PEP 269

[Martin von Loewis]

> - if it's purpose is to offer a framework for small languages
> support, there are already modules around that support that
> (SPARK, PLY ...), the only advantage of PEP 269 being speed
> wrt to the pure python solutions, because of the use of the internal
> CPython parser, OTOH the other solutions are more flexible...

I agree. I'd like to see (or perhaps write myself) a proposal for
adding one or two of these packages to the Python core (two are
probably better, since there is no one-size-fits-all parser framework,
and adding two avoids the impression that there is a single "blessed"
parser).

> It should be considered that Jython does not contain a parser
> similar to CPython one. Because of this jython does not offer parser 
> module support. So implementing the PEP for Jython would require 
> writing a Java or pure python equivalent of the CPython parser.

If the goal is to play with extensions to the Python grammar, I think
this is less of an issue. Of course, anybody wanting to extend the C
grammar could easily modify the Python interpreter itself.

So I think I'm -1 on this PEP, on the basis that this is code bloat
(i.e. new functionality used too rarely).

Regards,
Martin