On 4/04/20 9:29 am, Brett Cannon wrote:
I think "needs" is a bit strong. It would be nice, though. Regardless, as long as this is a net improvement over the status quo I don't see this being rejected on the grounds that an LR or LALR parser would be better since we have a working PEG parser today. :)
Even if the section only says "We didn't consider any alternatives, because...", I still think it should be there. -- Greg _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/URT2FASB34SF2VDC57ZCWEEL2RLMIGN7/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
