On Jun 6, 8:59 pm, "Ali Afshar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 06/06/07, Stani's Python Editor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > A good point. I think we all have been thinking about this. Important > > issues for the design is the extraction method and the sources. > > > *the method* > > Importing is a lazy, but accurate way of importing, but is security wise > > not such a good idea. Parsing throught an AST compiler is better, > > however more difficult. Here are two options. > > > From version 2.5 the standard Python compiler converts internally the > > source code to an abstract syntax tree (AST) before producing the > > bytecode. So probably that is a good way to go as every python > > distribution has this battery included. > > > As Nicolas suggested earlier on this mailing list, there is another > > option: the AST compiler in python or PyPy: > > What concerns me about these is whether they would work in a module > which has a syntax error. > > I believe Wing's compiler bit of their code completion is open source. > I remember having seen the code. It is indeed, but is implemented in C, which means an extra dependency and not a 100% python solution. Normally modules (especially in the pythonpath) which you import don't have syntax errors. Maybe logilabs implementation handles syntax errors well as it is developed for PyLint. Nicolas?
Stani
