On 11/28/05, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] My mental model > of parsing & compiling in the presence of a parse tree > is like this: > > [source] -> scanner -> [tokens] > -> parser -> [AST] -> code_generator -> [code] > > The fact that there still seems to be another kind of > parse tree in between the scanner and the AST generator > is an oddity which I hope will eventually disappear.
Have a look at http://python.org/sf/1337696 -- a reimplementation of pgen in Python that I did for Elemental and am contributing to the PSF. It customizes the tree generation callback so as to let you produce an style of AST you like. > > I know > > Guido has said he doesn't like punishing the performance of small > > scripts in the name of large-scale apps > > To me, that's an argument in favour of always generating > a .pyc, even for scripts. I'm not sure I follow the connection. But I wouldn't mind if someone contributed code that did this. :) -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
