On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:05 AM, fwierzbi...@gmail.com <fwierzbi...@gmail.com> wrote: > As a re-implementor of ast.py that tries to be node for node > compatible, I'm fine with #1 but would really like to have tests that > will fail in test_ast.py to alert me!
[and] On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Michael Foord <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> wrote: > A lot of tools that work with Python source code use ast - so even though > other implementations may not use the same ast "under the hood" they will > probably at least *want* to provide a compatible implementation. IronPython > is in that boat too (although I don't know if we *have* a compatible > implementation yet - we certainly feel like we *should* have one). Ok, so it sounds like ast is *not* limited to CPython? That makes it harder to justify changing it just so as to ease the compilation process in CPython (as opposed to add new language features). -- --Guido van Rossum (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
