- all classes are new-style (but ripping out classobject.[ch] isn't done)
- int/int -> float
- all exceptions must derive from BaseException
- absolute import
- 'as' and 'with' are keywords
Anyway, this is the changes to the with-statement
so that __exit__ must return a true value in order
for a pending exception to be ignored.
The PEP (343) is already updated.
- IMPORT_NAME takes an extra argument from the stack: the relativeness of
the import. Only passed to __import__ when it's not -1.
- __import__() takes an optional 5th argument for the same thing; it
__defaults to -1 (old semantics: try relative, then absolute)
- 'from . import name' imports name (be it module or regular attribute)
from the current module's *package*. Likewise, 'from .module import name'
will import name from a sibling to the current module.
- Importing from outside a package is not allowed; 'from . import sys' in a
toplevel module will not work, nor will 'from .. import sys' in a
(single-level) package.
- 'from __future__ import absolute_import' will turn on the new semantics
for import and from-import: imports will be absolute, except for
from-import with dots.
Includes tests for regular imports and importhooks, parser changes and a
NEWS item, but no compiler-package changes or documentation changes.
This was started by Mike Bland and completed by Guido
(with help from Neal).
This still needs a __future__ statement added;
Thomas is working on Michael's patch for that aspect.
There's a small amount of code cleanup and refactoring
in ast.c, compile.c and ceval.c (I fixed the lltrace
behavior when EXT_POP is used -- however I had to make
lltrace a static global).
breaks the parser module, because it adds the if/else construct as well as
two new grammar rules for backward compatibility. If no one else fixes
parsermodule, I guess I'll go ahead and fix it later this week.
The TeX code was checked with texcheck.py, but not rendered. There is
actually a slight incompatibility:
>>> (x for x in lambda:0)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: iteration over non-sequence
changes into
>>> (x for x in lambda: 0)
File "<stdin>", line 1
(x for x in lambda: 0)
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
Since there's no way the former version can be useful, it's probably a
bugfix ;)
This code generated a C assertion:
assert 1, ([s for s in x] +
[s for s in x])
pass
assert was completely broken, it needed to use the proper block.
compiler_use_block() is now no longer used, so remove it.
