On 4 April 2011 19:07, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph at twistedmatrix.com> wrote: > > On Apr 4, 2011, at 2:00 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> 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? > > Oh, definitely not. I would be pretty dismayed if tools like <http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~divmod-dev/divmod.org/trunk/files/head:/Pyflakes/> would not run on Jython & PyPy. Add py.test as an application that uses the AST to support Jython, PyPy and CPython in a portable way. I always assumed AST was created *because* bytecode was too CPython specific (but then I've never implemented a language). -- Debian GNU/Linux -- The Power of Freedom www.debian.org | www.gnu.org | www.kernel.org
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4