2012/12/27 Sven Brauch :
> 2012/12/27 Guido van Rossum :
>> So just submit a patch to the tracker...
>>
>> --Guido
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, December 27, 2012, Sven Brauch wrote:
>>>
>>> 2012/12/27 Nick Coghlan :
>>> > It certainl
2012/12/27 Guido van Rossum :
> So just submit a patch to the tracker...
>
> --Guido
>
>
> On Thursday, December 27, 2012, Sven Brauch wrote:
>>
>> 2012/12/27 Nick Coghlan :
>> > It certainly sounds like its worth considering for 3.4. It's a new
>&g
2012/12/27 Nick Coghlan :
> It certainly sounds like its worth considering for 3.4. It's a new
> feature, though, so it unfortunately wouldn't be possible to backport
> it to any earlier releases.
Yes, that is understandable. It wouldn't be much of a problem tough,
my whole project is pretty bleed
Hello!
I'm writing a static language analyzer for an IDE which reuses the
CPython parser (for parsing) [1]. Two years ago, I asked about a few
changes to be made to the AST provided by CPython, but the discussion
thread dried up before a definite decision was made. I decided to just
copy the parse
t; On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
>> 2010/12/26 Sven Brauch :
>>> In that discussion, there's been different opinions about which
>>> behaviour is better; main arguments were "consistency" for the current
>>> and "usefu
Hey,
yeah, you're right, that would be even better. Currently it would also
give a 3 for bar in "foo.bar.baz". I'd be fine with both
solutions, but yours seems more logical.
Bye,
Sven
2010/12/27 Glenn Linderman :
> On 12/26/2010 1:41 PM, Sven Brauch wrote:
>
> H
It should maybe be noted that the proposed patch would change that,
too, so it would be the same behaviour for all three types
(subscripts, calls, and attributes) again. Just more intuitive. :)
2010/12/27 Benjamin Peterson :
> 2010/12/26 Sven Brauch :
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I rec
Hi there,
I recently filed a feature request in the tracker to change the
behaviour of the parser in terms of setting ranges on attribute AST
nodes, because I'm working on an application which needs more
information than is currently provided. I suggested to change the
behaviour from
foo.bar.baz #
