On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > The only real danger is > > > > 3. + a > > 3 .+ a > > > > But in this case pointwise operation does not make sense. > > really? what if "a" is a froob? Really. Because 3 is a single point. It doesn't matter what a is. > >>> print 3.+a() > SyntaxError: sorry, that doesn't make sense. try inserting a space. Why isn't this 3. + a()? Hmm, I can see my bad habit of writing long posts so that they are often quoted only partially. Here's the missing half: So I suppose the following rules would resolve all the ambiguities: Dot binds with preceding number. Otherwise it binds with following operator. Otherwise it is a member indicator. Otherwise it is syntax error. Examples: 2.+b a.+b <-- only this is new a.b a.3 Huaiyu
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4