Sylvain Th�nault wrote:
> On Friday 28 January � 10:51, Aahz wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 28, 2005, Michael Foord wrote: >> >>> epydoc isn't abandoned - but happydoc is. >>> >>> I like epydoc, but would also prefer to see a version that parsed >>> source code rather than importing it. Would make it much harder to >>> link classes to super classes etc though I guess. >> >> >> One of the primary goals for Python 2.5 is to finally push through the >> AST branch. If you want parsed source, consider joining python-dev and >> helping with that project. > > > > What do you mean ? Core python being based on a more usable ast than the > one returned by the parser module ? More than that ?
Yep. The AST branch is doing away with using the parse tree (what the parser module returns) to generate bytecode and is instead taking a more traditional two-step process; parse tree -> AST, AST -> bytecode.
The hope is to get it done for Python 2.5 . Now whether that includes a marshalling ability to emit the AST as Python objects that one can use in code is another story. I am sure people would love to have access to it but it is not a top priority right now.
> Would be very interested if you could tell be more about your point, or > giving me some pointers... >
It is in Python CVS as a branch called ast-branch. There is going to be work done at PyCon as a sprint and development will most likely continue after that until it is finished.
-Brett _______________________________________________ Doc-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/doc-sig
