David Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: > Obviously if there's another sufficiently good argument for the visitor > approach, I'm all ears. But again, if we do that I think we should do > it for the compiler as well. I'm not sure how much support such a > change would have.
The argument is that it would be possible to enable or disable individual optimizations this way. For the compiler, there's no need for this, because there's only one thing to do per node type (although I suppose we could just pass that set of things into the node walker). Another argument against is that it would be harder to combine optimizations when that's relevant. I don't think it's worth worrying about until there are a dozen or so AST-level optimizations. _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue4264> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
