GeezerVison

"Fred L. Drake, Jr." <fdrake@acm.org> writes:

> Michael Hudson writes:
>  > 1) Is there anything is the standard library that does the equivalent
>  >    of
> 
>   No, but I have a chunk of code that does in a different way.  

I'm guessing everyone who's played with the parser much does, hence
the suggestion.  I agree my implementation is probably not optimal - I
just threw it together as quickly as I could!

> Where in the library do you think it belongs?  The compiler package
> sounds like the best place, but that's not installed by default.
> (Jeremy, is that likely to change soon?)

Actually, I'd have thought the parser module would be most natural,
but that would probably mean doing the _module.c trick, and it's
probably not worth the bother.  OTOH, it seems that wrapping any given
extension module in a python module is becoming if anything the norm,
so maybe it is.

Cheers,
M.

-- 
  I don't remember any dirty green trousers.
                                             -- Ian Jackson, ucam.chat