[Python-3000] AST access (WAS: Adaptation vs. Generic Functions)

[Guido van Rossum]

On 4/9/06, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> Robert Brewer wrote:
> > Part of the benefit of the bytecode-hacking is that your expression
> > never has to be in a string.
>
> I'm wondering whether there should be some kind of
> "code literal" syntax, where you write a Python
> expression and the compiler transforms it as far
> as the AST stage, then makes it available to the
> program as an AST object.
>
> Or would that be too close to "programmable
> syntax" for Guido's liking?

I'm more concerned about the choice of AST data structure and how it
affects IronPython, PyPy, Jython and possible other Python
implementations. I'd like to keep both the AST and the bytecode spec
out of the language spec, otherwise those implementations will face
the tough choice of either changing their parser technology to one
that is probably less suited, or implementing two full parsers.

--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)