RetroSearch Browse

Mon Apr 4 20:00:51 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110437.html

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:05 AM, fwierzbicki at gmail.com
<fwierzbicki at gmail.com> wrote:
> As a re-implementor of ast.py that tries to be node for node
> compatible, I'm fine with #1 but would really like to have tests that
> will fail in test_ast.py to alert me!

[and]

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Michael Foord
<fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk> wrote:
> A lot of tools that work with Python source code use ast - so even though
> other implementations may not use the same ast "under the hood" they will
> probably at least *want* to provide a compatible implementation. IronPython
> is in that boat too (although I don't know if we *have* a compatible
> implementation yet - we certainly feel like we *should* have one).

Ok, so it sounds like ast is *not* limited to CPython? That makes it
harder to justify changing it just so as to ease the compilation
process in CPython (as opposed to add new language features).

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110437.html below:

[Python-Dev] Policy for making changes to the AST