Brett Cannon wrote: > As for making the AST branch itself more of a standard, I have talked to > Jeremy Hylton about that and he didn't like the idea, at least for now. > The reasons for keeping it as "experimental" in terms of exposure at the > Python level is that we do not want to lock ourselves down to some AST > spec that we end up changing in the future. It's the same reasoning > behind not officially documenting the marshal format; we want the > flexibility. > > How best to resolve all of this, I don't know. I completely understand > not wanting to lock ourselves down to an AST too soon. Might need to > wait a little while after the AST has been out in the wild to see what > the user response is and then make a decision.
One of the biggest issues I have with the current AST is that I don't believe it really gets the "slice" and "extended slice" terminology correct (it uses 'extended slice' to refer to multi-dimensional indexing, but the normal meaning of that phrase is to refer to the use of a step argument for a slice [1]) Cheers, Nick. [1] http://www.python.org/doc/2.3.5/whatsnew/section-slices.html -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.boredomandlaziness.org _______________________________________________ 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
