Message317718
| Author |
mbussonn |
| Recipients |
Mark.Shannon, benjamin.peterson, brett.cannon, eitan.adler, flherne, georg.brandl, lukasz.langa, mbussonn, methane, minrk, ncoghlan, ned.deily, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner |
| Date |
2018年05月25日.20:59:49 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1527281990.01.0.682650639539.issue32911@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Just to quickly touch on Matthias' question about opt-in or deprecations, a key thing to note is the ast module is automatically generated from the ASDL file, so either of those approaches would require developing a new mechanism in the code generator to support either approach.
Yes, I was mostly thinking of `compile(..., mode, flags=PyAstOnly)` as to where the deprecation could be.
Thinking a bit more about the `compile`'s `multiline` option, that would also be quite useful to allow some construct that are so far forbidden, like top-level `await`.
I'm thinking that splitting `exec` into two options:
- `module` which could do what current 3.7 does and find docstrings plus do some optimisation and sanity check if necessary, prevent top-level await.
- `multiline` which would treat the source as a sequence of statement, allwo top level `await` ... etc.
this could allow both to evolve and have their individual advantage, leaving `exec` unchanged for legacy reasons. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2018年05月25日 20:59:50 | mbussonn | set | recipients:
+ mbussonn, brett.cannon, georg.brandl, rhettinger, ncoghlan, vstinner, benjamin.peterson, ned.deily, methane, lukasz.langa, Mark.Shannon, serhiy.storchaka, eitan.adler, minrk, flherne |
| 2018年05月25日 20:59:50 | mbussonn | set | messageid: <1527281990.01.0.682650639539.issue32911@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2018年05月25日 20:59:49 | mbussonn | link | issue32911 messages |
| 2018年05月25日 20:59:49 | mbussonn | create |
|