Parse built-in functions

[fcollonval]

Would it be acceptable to add built-in functions as parser statements?

I'm gladly push a PR for this.

[marijnh]

These can be shadowed, since they are just identifiers in the grammar, so I don't think it is a good idea to treat them specially.

def plusOne(abs):
  return abs + 1

plusOne(1)

[krassowski]

Is there a way for downstream to opt-in or implement these easily? I see the changes in #13 go pretty deep into the grammar and patching these would be rather labours. Could it be an opt-in setting?

[axil]

Here, syntax highlighting serves as a hint that this is a keyword and it should not be shadowed. Without highlighting, it is much easier to shadow it for a newbie.

I teach python to students at a university who happen to be 'fluent' in other programming languages, and it is a common error for them to name variables as 'list', 'str', 'sum', 'min/max', 'id' or 'vars', which are not built-ins in other languages. Of course they will learn it — later — but bad habits are simpler to form than they are to break. There is no easy way for them to see if these names are built-ins or not unless they are highlighted.

I would strongly vote for keeping them highlighted.

[Atcold]

Coming here from the same perspective of @axil.
How is one supposed to know a given keyword is reserved if it's not highlighted?

[zzhengnan]

Another potential data point in favor of this request: All major IDEs/editors highlight built-ins, as does command line IPython.

[marijnh]

This issue has been moved to issue #9 on the repository's new home.