On Mon, 2005-01-03 at 23:17, Tony Meyer wrote:
Perhaps interested parties should take up the discussion on
the compiler-sig.
This isn't listed in the 'currently active' SIGs list on
http://python.org/sigs/ - is it still active, or will it now be? If so,
perhaps it should be added to the
The list archives look like they are mostly full of spam, but it's
also the only list we've used to discuss the ast work. I haven't
really worried whether the sig was active, as long as the list was
around. I don't mind if you want to resurrect it. Is there some way
to delete the spam from the
The AST branch has been nearly complete for several Python versions
now. The last time a serious effort was made was in May I believe, but
it wasn't enough to merge the code back into 2.4, alas.
It would be a real shame if this code was abandoned. If we're going to
make progress with things like
Guido van Rossum wrote:
The AST branch has been nearly complete for several Python versions
now. The last time a serious effort was made was in May I believe, but
it wasn't enough to merge the code back into 2.4, alas.
It would be a real shame if this code was abandoned.
[SNIP]
So, I'm pleading.
On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 06:02:52PM -0800, Brett C. wrote:
Although if someone can start sooner than by all means, go for it!
And obviously help would be great since it isn't a puny codebase
(4,000 lines so far for the CST-AST and AST-bytecode code).
And obviously knowing a little more about
