Paul Sokolovsky <pfal...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
> What prevents you from using ast.parse(tokenize.untokenize(token_stream))? That's exactly the implementation in the patch now submitted against this issue. But that's the patch for CPython, the motive of the proposal here is to establish a standard API call for *Python*, which different implementation can implement how they like/can/need. > Also, tokens -> AST is not the only disconnected part in the underlying > compiler. We should address them, one by one. > Stuff like AST -> Symbol Table Kinda yes, again, based on CPython implementation history, we have only source -> Symbol table (https://docs.python.org/3/library/symtable.html). Would be nice to address that (separately of course). > AST -> Optimized AST Yes. PEP511 touched on that, but as it-as-a-whole was rejected, any useful sub-ideas from it don't seem to get further progress either (like, being able to disable some optimizations, and then maybe even exposing them as standalone passes). > I'd also suggest moving the discussion to the Python-ideas, for a much > greater audience. That's how I usually do, but I posted too much there recently. I wanted to submit a patch right away, but noticed that standard commit message format is "bpo-XXXXX: ...", so I created a ticket here to reference in the commit. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue42729> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
