torsdagen den 2 december 2004 00.12 skrev Christian Tismer: > Ok. But another thing that annoys me is that this macro language > still has rpythonic restrictions, when I use the unmodified > flow space. I think it should be full Python. > I had the strong feeling that I did a whole mess with no real > benefit. But I might be wrong.
I think we need to define what RPython really is. Probably this is best done by maintaining a list of what limitations relative to Python there are. Initially, this list does not need to be exhaustive. Anything we know about restrictions will help. It is really hard to write any RPython if you don't know the limits and it is equally hard to know what to translate if you don't know which constructs that need the translation. If we can't nail anything down at the moment, I'd like to see an explanation why, as well as some sort of roadmap leading to a specification of what RPython is. Even if it is a highly moving target, we need to track the language with some sort of documentation. Jacob _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
