[pypy-dev] Questions about the C core

[Nicolas Chauvat]

On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 10:55:05AM +0100, Nicolas Chauvat wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 02:32:54PM +1300, Andrew McGregor wrote:
> > Therefore a Pythonic macro should be:
> > 
> > A class which adds it's grammar
> >>> ...
> > Then the macro provides code which is called with the parse trees resulting 
> > from that grammar, modifies them, and returns the parse tree that will 
> > actually be compiled.  If you want to evaluate some bits at compile time, 
> > do that explicitly in the macro (opposite way around to lisp, where you 
> > have complicated rules).
> 
> I want that!
> 
> Here is an interpreted language that does that : http://pliant.cx/
> 
> Fully GPL. Source available. Worth a look.

Note: I perfectly understand the goal of Minimal Python: do *not* change
the language or parts of it (yet), just experiment with a minimal intepreter.

That said, since Holger asked for desciptions of links here it goes:

Both www.mozart-oz.org and pliant.cx (and others) are interesting for
they rely on a minimal intepreter that lets one define part of the
language itself (and basic ones like loop structure, for example).

It can also be remarked that a good part of theoritically elegant languages
(who said lisp?) rely on minimal interpreters. Having Python move
forward in that direction may guarantee a nicer future for the language
and should be easier to do thanks to the support of its large community.

[back-to-lurking]

-- 
Nicolas Chauvat

http://www.logilab.com - "Mais où est donc Ornicar ?" - LOGILAB, Paris (France)