RetroSearch Browse

Thu Jun 5 00:12:23 CEST 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-June/134782.html

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Paul Sokolovsky <pmiscml at gmail.com> wrote:
> That said, and unlike previous attempts to develop a small Python
> implementations (which of course existed), we're striving to be exactly
> a Python language implementation, not a Python-like language
> implementation. As there's no formal, implementation-independent
> language spec, what constitutes a compatible language implementation is
> subject to opinions, and we welcome and appreciate independent review,
> like this thread did.

Actually, there is a "formal, implementation-independent language spec":

https://docs.python.org/3/reference/

>
>> Realistically, most Python code that works on Python 3.4 won't work
>> on Micropython (for various reasons, not just the string behavior)
>> and neither does it need to.
>
> That's true. However, as was said, we're striving to provide a
> compatible implementation, and compatibility claims must be validated.
> While we have simple "in-house" testsuite, more serious compatibility
> validation requires running a testsuite for reference implementation
> (CPython), and that's gradually being approached.

To a large extent the test suite in
http://hg.python.org/cpython/file/default/Lib/test effectively
validates (full) compliance with the corresponding release (change
"default" to the release branch of your choice).  With that goal, no
small effort has been made to mark implementation-specific tests as
such.  So uPy could consider using the test suite (and explicitly skip
the tests for features that uPy doesn't support).

-eric

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-June/134782.html below:

[Python-Dev] Internal representation of strings and Micropython