Gary Herron wrote: > Good point. I've never actually used (a<b<c), but I'm pleasently > surprised when reminded of it's existence. There is however a > difference. A whole string of '<' operators (or even of string of > mixed '<' and '>' operators) can be understood by considering each > operation in isolation as a binary operation. Trying hard to avoid PEP 308 discussions: :-) Yes and no. You cannot collapse the expression, so these binary "operations" are really only partial operations. Granted, with th*n/el*e the left-most operand participates in both partial operations, but I'll leave that discussion to c.l.py. I was just pointing out that there's precedent for (a OP b OP c) != ((a OP b) OP c) != (a OP (b OP c)). -Jerry
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