[pypy-dev] bootstrapping issues

Brett Cannon bac at OCF.Berkeley.EDU
Sat Jan 11 22:43:49 CET 2003

[holger krekel]

> I think that - if in doubt - we follow the lead
> from CPython e.g. regarding coding style, language
> definition etc.  Every deviation should be justified
> by the goals.  I don't think we should follow a PEP
> process soon, though.

All seems reasonable.  No need to stop using something that works and
people are, in general, familiar with.  Also would make it easier to apply
any code from Mini-Py (or is there some already accepted abbreviation for
this project?) back into CPython if so desired.

> Bootstrapping will be a hot topic for Minimal Python
> itself.  We probably first want to use the CPython
> development environemnt to get going.  We probably
> want to base it on the python-2.3 cvs tree.

Once again I agree.  I assume the other option is the maint-2.2 branch.
That is not a good idea, in my opinion, since generators require  a
__future__ statement in 2.2.  Might as well try to get all the good
features we can into this.

And speaking of features, how is the project going to view features that
we all know are on their way out at some point?  I am specifically
thinking of integer division and old-style classes.  Both are destined to
disappear once Py3K comes out (whenever that is), and so should time be
spend in implementing thess features?  I am assuming
backwards-compatibility takes precedence over code simplification but I
thought I would double-check.

> There is the idea of not using make/configure/automake
> but a simple understandable debuggable (read: python based)
> build environment.  IOW words the number of dependencies
> for building Minimal Python should also be minimal.

What about A-A-P (http://www.a-a-p.org/index.html)?  It's Python-based and
seems like a well-designed tool (but I am a Vim fan so I am biased
toward's the creator's work =).



More information about the Pypy-dev mailing list