Am 16.01.2014 20:46, schrieb Yury Selivanov:
Guido,
On Thursday, January 16, 2014, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org <mailto:guido@python.org>> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov.ml@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > The whole discussion of whether clinic should write its output > right in the source file (buffered or not), or in a separate sidefile, > started because we currently cannot run the clinic during the build > process, since it’s written in python.
But that's why the output is checked in. It's the same with the parser IIRC. (And yes, there's a bootstrap issue -- but that's solved by using an older Python version.)
> But what if, at some point, someone implements the Tools/clinic.py in > pure C, so that integrating it directly in the build process will be > possible? In this case, the question is — should we use python code > in the argument clinic DSL? > > If we keep it strictly declarative, then, at least, we’ll have this > possibility in the future.
Sounds like a pretty unlikely scenario. Why would you implement clinic in C?
Unlikely, yes.
About as unlikely as switching the Python sources to C++ and using templates to implement a Clinic-like DSL :) Georg