I wonder if a couple of demos would help, "see how much better this is" rather than "ask me about how much better this is". Maybe a comparison like: https://gist.github.com/kennethreitz/973705 which compares `urllib2` to `requests` code to do the same thing. And perhaps some context like "I want to know if this seems like a candidate for inclusion before I put together all the integrated docs. / tests / implementation pull request" to make it obvious you not expecting someone else to do all that.
A slightly different route might be to do the above demo / comparison stuff in a fully fledged package on GitHub / pypi / readthedocs so that you can get some feedback from people trying it out then propose getting into core libs by referencing the package. Maybe you've already started in that direction, not sure. Cheers -Terry On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 12:30 PM Edward K. Ream <edream...@gmail.com> wrote: > Here is the first draft of a reply to Python issue #33337 > <https://bugs.python.org/issue33337>. This long-dormant issue discusses > possible improvements to python tools. > > I would appreciate it if you would read the thread in detail, and let me > know if the following reply seems on topic and useful. Thanks. > > ===== Start Post > > > So if users want to write tools that manipulate Python code, the standard > library doesn't provide them with great options. > > > I suggest the following plan: > > Hello all, > > I would like to suggest another possibility. > > For about three months I have been obsessed with the general problem of > manipulating Python source code *easily*. I have long experience with such > tools. Along the way I have studied the > [asttokens](https://pypi.org/project/asttokens/), > [fstringify](https://pypi.org/project/fstringify/), and > [black](https://pypi.org/project/black/) projects. > Imo, each in its own way illustrates that something significantly better > would be welcome. Each project uses complex, idiosyncratic, opaque > generators to generate results. What if something much simpler were > possible? > > In late October, 2019 I completed a token-based version of fstringify. I > could have stopped there, but then a new thought intruded. What if we could > define a **token-order traversal** of parse trees? This new idea sparked an > avalanche of new ideas. I couldn't let them go. > > After three months of literally day and night development this single idea > has turned into a major new tool, contained at present in [leoAst.py]( > https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/blob/fstrings/leo/core/leoAst.py). > The code is simple, general, flexible, and fast, in stark contrast to the > tools mentioned above. > > Leo's [issue #1440](https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/issues/1440) > (Unify the ast and token worlds) > contains extensive documentation for this project. The first comment > contains an overview of the project, the second comment contains a Theory > of Operation, and the third contains a History of the Project, with links > to the many Engineering Notebook (ENB) post that I wrote along the way. > > Imo, the TokenOrderGenerator (TOG) and TokenOrderTraverser (TOT) might be > candidates for inclusion in the standard library, but first you Python devs > will want to decide whether this project is actually something that is even > vaguely of interest to you :-) > > I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Please let me know > your thoughts. > > Edward K. Ream > An old man, crazy about computer programming > > ===== End Post > > Edward > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "leo-editor" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/c70a9009-31d5-4cc4-b8d4-6e3af34d6d9f%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/c70a9009-31d5-4cc4-b8d4-6e3af34d6d9f%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAFPg46RmMgwVzuvRdU6G%2BgWR346rkNy61scpSPc0F4BUNqDzuw%40mail.gmail.com.