On Jan 10, 2008 1:50 PM, Joe Angell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How do you plan on letting third party tools utilize the new grammar?
Don't need to plan anything; people are already using the AST that Python's compiler uses since 2.5 came out. > Will they have to write their own parser then, or is there some kind > of plugin architecture? No parser is required; Python's parser already handles the parsing. -Brett > > Thanks, > > joe > > > On Jan 10, 2008 10:34 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Jan 10, 2008 8:39 AM, Joe Angell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My apologies if this has been asked before, but are there any plans to > > > add the compiler module back in to py3k? If so, any idea on a > > > timeline? If help is needed I may be able to put in some time on > > > this. I've already back ported some of the py3k grammar (function > > > parameter annotations) to python 2.5.1 so I can use this with the > > > compiler module, but I think it would be sweet to just use py3k > > > directly. > > > > AFAIK there are no such plans; maintaining two versions of the > > compiler (one in Python and one in C) has turned out to be a > > nightmare, with the Python version always running behind and having > > bugs because it wasn't used much for real work. > > > > -- > > --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-3000 mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/brett%40python.org > _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
