ANN: Pyrex 0.4.3
Greg Ewing
greg at cosc.canterbury.ac.nz
Tue Aug 27 21:42:19 EDT 2002
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Tue Aug 27 21:42:19 EDT 2002
- Previous message (by thread): ANN: Pyrex 0.4.3
- Next message (by thread): ANN: Pyrex 0.4.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> There are pros and cons to a new construct, as many noticed already. > If Pyrex offers me a `for from' construct, I guess I'll use it. But I > would have preferred to write Pyrex the same as I write Python on this > matter. I don't have any philosophical objection to assuming that builtin names have their usual bindings. But optimising "for x in range(...)" in this way wouldn't be easy, given the way Pyrex is currently structured. By the time the compiler knows that the "range" being referred to is the built-in one, it's already built a parse tree on the assumption that a function call is going to be made. I may tackle this problem later, but there are other things to be done first. Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+ University of Canterbury, | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a | Christchurch, New Zealand | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc. | greg at cosc.canterbury.ac.nz +--------------------------------------+
- Previous message (by thread): ANN: Pyrex 0.4.3
- Next message (by thread): ANN: Pyrex 0.4.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list