Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #46354 > unrolled thread

Re: Python #ifdef

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Python #ifdef Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2013-05-28 18:23 -0700
    Re: Python #ifdef Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-29 14:55 +0000
      Re: Python #ifdef Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 01:05 +1000
        Re: Python #ifdef Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-29 15:25 +0000
        Re: Python #ifdef Erik Max Francis <max@alcyone.com> - 2013-06-02 16:57 -0700
          Re: Python #ifdef Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-06-02 20:23 -0400
          Re: Python #ifdef Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2013-06-02 19:29 -0500
          Re: Python #ifdef Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-06-03 12:05 +1000

#46354 — Re: Python #ifdef

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Here're slides from a presentation about writing code that runs on 2.x and
3.x: http://stromberg.dnsalias.org/~dstromberg/Intro-to-Python/

And in case you still want a preprocessor for Python (you likely don't need
one this time), here's an example of doing this using the venerable m4:
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/red-black-tree-mod .  Note the many comments
added to keep line numbers consistent.

Sent from my android phone.
On May 28, 2013 12:47 PM, "Carlos Nepomuceno" <carlosnepomuceno@outlook.com>
wrote:

> Are there Python 'preprocessor directives'?
>
> I'd like to have something like '#ifdef' to mix code from Python 2 and 3
> in a single file.
>
> Is that possible? How?
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#46388

On 2013-05-29, Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> wrote:

> And in case you still want a preprocessor for Python (you likely don't need
> one this time), here's an example of doing this using the venerable m4:
> https://pypi.python.org/pypi/red-black-tree-mod .  Note the many comments
> added to keep line numbers consistent.

I was wondering whether or not to mention m4.  Since m4 is (in my
mind) inextricably linked to RATFOR and sendmail config files I try
to avoid thinking about it lest the flashbacks start again...

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! Hmmm ... a CRIPPLED
                                  at               ACCOUNTANT with a FALAFEL
                              gmail.com            sandwich is HIT by a
                                                   TROLLEY-CAR ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46389

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:55 AM, Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 2013-05-29, Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> And in case you still want a preprocessor for Python (you likely don't need
>> one this time), here's an example of doing this using the venerable m4:
>> https://pypi.python.org/pypi/red-black-tree-mod .  Note the many comments
>> added to keep line numbers consistent.
>
> I was wondering whether or not to mention m4.  Since m4 is (in my
> mind) inextricably linked to RATFOR and sendmail config files I try
> to avoid thinking about it lest the flashbacks start again...

It's not a bad tool. I used it as a sort of PHP preprocessor, because
requirements at work had me wanting to have a source file defining a
PHP class and having an autogenerated section in the middle of that
class. PHP's 'include' directive doesn't work for that. Of course, had
we been using a better language, that wouldn't have been an issue (and
it stopped being an issue when we improved the design and stopped
using that class system, too, though I retained the makefile
directives about building .php.m4 -> .php files). But still, GNU M4 is
a decent piece of technology.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46392

On 2013-05-29, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:55 AM, Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2013-05-29, Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> And in case you still want a preprocessor for Python (you likely don't need
>>> one this time), here's an example of doing this using the venerable m4:
>>> https://pypi.python.org/pypi/red-black-tree-mod .  Note the many comments
>>> added to keep line numbers consistent.
>>
>> I was wondering whether or not to mention m4.  Since m4 is (in my
>> mind) inextricably linked to RATFOR and sendmail config files I try
>> to avoid thinking about it lest the flashbacks start again...
>
> It's not a bad tool. I used it as a sort of PHP preprocessor, 
> [...]
> But still, GNU M4 is a decent piece of technology.

I didn't mean to disparage m4 -- it always seemed well thought out and
useful.  It just happens to be associated with unpleasant things for
me.  [And it didn't really seem like a good option for the OP's
problem.]

Still, if one really did want a preprocessor for Python programs, m4
would be the first thing I'd look at.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! I wonder if I ought
                                  at               to tell them about my
                              gmail.com            PREVIOUS LIFE as a COMPLETE
                                                   STRANGER?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46740

On 05/29/2013 08:05 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> It's not a bad tool. I used it as a sort of PHP preprocessor, because
> requirements at work had me wanting to have a source file defining a
> PHP class and having an autogenerated section in the middle of that
> class. PHP's 'include' directive doesn't work for that. Of course, had
> we been using a better language, that wouldn't have been an issue (and
> it stopped being an issue when we improved the design and stopped
> using that class system, too, though I retained the makefile
> directives about building .php.m4 -> .php files). But still, GNU M4 is
> a decent piece of technology.

Agreed.  The terror that most people feel when hearing "m4" is because 
m4 was associated with sendmail, not because m4 was inherently awful. 
It has problems, but you'd only encounter them when doing something 
_very_ abstract.

-- 
Erik Max Francis && max@alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
  San Jose, CA, USA && 37 18 N 121 57 W && AIM/Y!M/Jabber erikmaxfrancis
   Substance is one of the greatest of our illusions.
    -- Sir Arthur Eddington

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46742

In article <n4mdnZkIOrRTRjbMnZ2dnUVZ5gOdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Erik Max Francis <max@alcyone.com> wrote:

> On 05/29/2013 08:05 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > It's not a bad tool. I used it as a sort of PHP preprocessor, because
> > requirements at work had me wanting to have a source file defining a
> > PHP class and having an autogenerated section in the middle of that
> > class. PHP's 'include' directive doesn't work for that. Of course, had
> > we been using a better language, that wouldn't have been an issue (and
> > it stopped being an issue when we improved the design and stopped
> > using that class system, too, though I retained the makefile
> > directives about building .php.m4 -> .php files). But still, GNU M4 is
> > a decent piece of technology.
> 
> Agreed.  The terror that most people feel when hearing "m4" is because 
> m4 was associated with sendmail

Arrrrggghhh.  You had to go and dredge up those bad memories?  I hadn't 
thought about sendmail config files in years.  I'll probably never be 
able to get to sleep tonight.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46743

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> The terror that most people feel when hearing "m4" is because m4 was
associated with sendmail, not because m4 was inherently awful.

In fact, m4 made sendmail configs easier to maintain.

Skip

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46751

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Erik Max Francis <max@alcyone.com> wrote:
> On 05/29/2013 08:05 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> It's not a bad tool. I used it as a sort of PHP preprocessor, because
>> requirements at work had me wanting to have a source file defining a
>> PHP class and having an autogenerated section in the middle of that
>> class. PHP's 'include' directive doesn't work for that. Of course, had
>> we been using a better language, that wouldn't have been an issue (and
>> it stopped being an issue when we improved the design and stopped
>> using that class system, too, though I retained the makefile
>> directives about building .php.m4 -> .php files). But still, GNU M4 is
>>
>> a decent piece of technology.
>
>
> Agreed.  The terror that most people feel when hearing "m4" is because m4
> was associated with sendmail, not because m4 was inherently awful. It has
> problems, but you'd only encounter them when doing something _very_
> abstract.

Ah. I actually wasn't aware of m4's use with sendmail. I first met it
as the aforementioned PHP preprocessor, simply by Googling for
something along the lines of "generic preprocessor". First hit solved
my problems.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web