On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 01:00 Stephen J. Turnbull < turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
> However, we would probably not want to burden all loops with the > exception-handling machinery, so the compiler would have to do some > hacky backtracking (I doubt that the arbitrary lookahead needed to > handle "maybe we got some except clauses coming?" during parsing would > be acceptable) and fill that in *after* recognizing that there are > except clauses in this for statement. Maybe you’re thinking of a “one-pass” compiler, like the original Pascal compiler, that generates code during parsing. That’s not how modern compilers work anymore. :-) The parser builds an AST, and the code generator uses the whole AST as input. It would not be “hacky” for the compiler to generate different code for the first half of a compound statement depending on how it ends. (However, it *would* be hacky to vary based on whether a statement was followed by a certain other statement, as that would require going “up” in the AST.) —Guido -- --Guido (mobile)
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/U35XAOQ4VWTOR7ZW3ODD2XKLINKXTSYV/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
