4 ms·
I can't believe someone skilled enough to do this has actually not realized why it is a colossally bad idea. Having a working compiler is just one tiny aspect
by tasty_freeze 13y ago
I can't believe someone skilled enough to do this has actually not realized why it is a colossally bad idea. Having a working compiler is just one tiny aspect of the problem. Unless there is a transparent way to interoperate with the rest of the Python ecosystem (libraries, tools), it is dead in the water.
Even then, this seems like a lot of work to overcome a non-problem, akin to developing a C++11 compiler which uses "begin" and "end" instead of braces because of some emotional attachment to Pascal. Really, if you are a programmer and the only thing stopping you from using Python to solve some problem is its indentation rules, you should stop and reevaluate your priorities.
- vezzy-fnord 13y agoEven then, this seems like a lot of work to overcome a non-problem, akin to developing a C++11 compiler which uses "begin" and "end" instead of braces because of some emotional attachment to Pascal. The thing is, it's actually trivial to do that using the C++ preprocessor. In fact, Steve Bourne wrote the Bourne shell exactly in this fashion, with the following C substitution macros (based on Algol-68): #define STRING char * #define IF if( #define THEN ){ #define ELSE } else { #define FI ;} #define WHILE while ( #define DO ({ #define OD ;} #define INT int #define BEGIN { #define END } Source: Expert C Programming: Deep C Secrets, p. 13. Peter Van der Linden. 1994. (this isn't to deny that Python with Braces is a rather frivolous idea)
- shuzchen 13y agoI'm mostly surprised that they went into the actual parser/compiler and modified that. If I were crazy enough to do this, I'd probably just write a pythonb-to-python compiler.