cc'ing Jeremy Hylton who made the decision to use Zephyr.
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Eli Bendersky <eli...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Some history (as best as I could collect it) followed by a question: > > Before Python 2.5, the ast stdlib module was auto generated by a script > named astgen.py from a textual AST definition in Tools/compiler/ast.txt. > > Since 2.5 (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0339/) ASTs are part of the > normal compilation flow by the Python compiler itself, and the ast module > uses the same ASTs generated from Parser/Python.asdl > > My question is, when the switch was made in 2.5 - why didn't the existing > AST-generating code was used and the path moved to ASDL instead? What > advantages does ASDL have over the previous approach? One reason I could > think of is that ASDL nodes are typed and that's maybe better for the > generated C code to handle. > > [My interest here is personal. One of my projects (pycparser) uses a > astgen.py-like approach, and in a new project I'm considering the options > again and remembered ASDL. ADSL's documentation it extremely scarce online > - seems like CPython is one of its only somewhat-visible users these days] > > Thanks in advance, > Eli > >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
