undefined | Better HN

0 pointsendian15y ago0 comments

Exactly. It's purely syntax to syntax.

Thanks for the confusion -- I've made the first paragraphs more clear about PJ's scope.

Title changed: s/compiler/syntax cross-compiler/ EDIT: title changed again

0 comments

3 comments · 2 top-level

s3graham15y ago· 1 in thread

I guess defining what you consider syntax features vs. Python language/runtime would be appropriate for the docs.

ie. 2 * * 1024? print object.__mro__? slice objects? __call__? etc.

endianOP15y ago

Here's the decision procedure:

If there's no collateral damage and the JS is clear (e.g. 28 --> Math.pow(2, 8)): do it.

If there's no proper way to express the JS in Python (e.g. instanceof and typeof keywords): do it

If it's really important (only "print" and "self"): do it

Else: DON'T

These few special cases that mess with your code are all mentioned in a section on the the main page.

And you can easily remove them from the transformations if you want.

That's not a term I've ever heard, and "cross compiler" tends to imply something else: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_compiler

I would call what you have done a source-to-source compiler: it translates from one target high-level language to another. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-to-source_compiler

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse