[TIP] Pythoscope proposal

Sylvain Thénault sylvain.thenault at logilab.fr
Mon Aug 18 23:51:09 PDT 2008

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:29:55PM -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 8:43 PM, Michał Kwiatkowski
> <constant.beta at gmail.com> wrote:
> [SNIP]
> > There are quite a few tools that explored Python source code analysis.
> > Those include:
> >  - source code style checkers, like pylint[2], PyChecker[3], and PyFlakes[4]
> >  - CodeInvestigator[5] debugger
> >  - Python4Ply[6], lexer and parser for Python
> >  - cyclomatic complexity analyzer[7]
> >  - type annotators, like PyPy type annotator[8] and annotate script[9]
> >  - Cheesecake codeparser.py[10]
> >
> > So we have a plenty of examples of using the stdlib's (now deprecated)
> > compiler module[11]. Any thoughts whether we should use the new _ast
> > module[12] appreciated. My guess is that we shouldn't, because we
> > don't want to force people into using the latest stable version of
> > Python. They may not have a choice while working on their legacy
> > applications.
> >
> Well, the question is if you want to deal with a smaller group of
> user's now or become obsolete later. Realize that if you use the
> compiler package you will not work with Python 3.0 at all. And once
> 2.6 comes out you will have the latest stable version and one version
> back with the _ast module.

FYI, I'm currently working on logilab-astng (the code representation
used by pylint) which is originally based on the compiler package to
make it works with the new _ast as well and provides somewhat compatible
ast whichever backend used.
Sylvain Thénault                               LOGILAB, Paris (France)
Formations Python, Zope, Plone, Debian:  http://www.logilab.fr/formations
Développement logiciel sur mesure:       http://www.logilab.fr/services
Python et calcul scientifique:           http://www.logilab.fr/science

More information about the testing-in-python mailing list