| ▲ | westurner 2 hours ago | |
Could this ast.sprint ast.walk optimization make libCST or bandit faster? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39111747 libCST: https://github.com/Instagram/LibCST bandit: https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit Links to codemod tools; "Baby Steps into Genetic Programming" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43617655 | ||
| ▲ | adhami 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
it's possible! although many of the constraints in this blog were because we wanted to work with ast module in Python. If we were allowed to create our own types, we can do so much better. I think ruff has an even faster walk by those standards. It seems bandit is using some decent optimizations already, looking at the `@test.checks("Call")` seems like they already captured some easy wins. The largest win honestly would be using the same ast.walk for multiple rules, which we also did, but not mentioned in the blog. | ||
| ▲ | westurner 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
AST: Abstract Syntax Tree FST: Full Syntax Tree CST: Concrete Syntax Tree Comment preservation is a feature | ||