[Python-Dev] PLY in stdlib (was cffi in stdlib)

[Eric Snow]

On Feb 27, 2013 4:31 AM, "Michael Foord" <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk> wrote:
>
>
> On 27 Feb 2013, at 11:00, David Beazley <dave at dabeaz.com> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> From: Eli Bendersky <eliben at gmail.com>
> >>
> >> I'll be the first one to admit that pycparser is almost certainly not
> >> generally useful enough to be exposed in the stdlib. So just using it
as an
> >> implementation detail is absolutely fine. PLY is a more interesting
> >> question, however, since PLY is somewhat more generally useful. That
said,
> >> I see all this as implementation details that shouldn't distract us
from
> >> the main point of whether cffi should be added.
> >>
> >
> > Regarding the inclusion of PLY or some subcomponent of it in the
standard library, it's not an entirely crazy idea in my opinion.
>
> +1 PLY is capable and well tried-and-tested. We used it in Resolver One
to implement a pretty large grammar and it is (in my opinion) best of breed
in the Python parser generator world. Being stable and widely used, with an
"available maintainer", makes it an ideal candidate for standard library
inclusion.

Is this still on the table?

-eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20130712/1f07229d/attachment.html>