On 3/5/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/5/07, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip] > > Transition Plan > > =============== > > > > Two additional transformations will be added to the 2to3 translation > > tool [2]_: > > > > * Method definitions named ``next`` will be renamed to ``__next__``. > > > > * Explicit calls to the ``next`` method will be replaced with calls > > to the built-in ``next`` function. For example, ``x.next()`` will > > become ``next(x)``. > > > > If the module being processed already contains a top-level function > > definition named ``next``, the second transformation will not be done; > > instead, calls to ``x.next()`` will be replaced with ``x.__next__()`` > > and a warning will be emitted. > > The basic transformations for this are (relatively) easy to implement. > Basing the second transformation on the absence of a top-level > function definition (don't forget assignments and imports!) for > "next", though, is going to require some surgery to 2to3's internals. > I'll see what I can do.
Preliminary results: After playing around with 2to3 for a while, it doesn't seem possible to base the second transformation on the presence of a top-level "next" binding. I can detect the binding's presence and warn about it, but just not in time to impact the "it.next()" -> "next(it)" transformation. I'm tinkering with an implementation that defers the transformation until 2to3 has finished walking the entire tree, but it's a lot of clutter and hackery for something like this. Collin Winter _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
