On Aug 8, 2004, at 5:20 PM, Edward K. Ream wrote: >> The second is not a valid string literal now -- > > That's why I suggested it. ""@" would be a new token, so the statement > about '@' in the delims section would remain essentially unchanged. I don't know if anyone is actually seriously considering this, but I'm -1. We're venturing into an area where the syntax makes people really not want to use the feature (and ""@" probably doesn't please the people who don't like the aesthetics of '@', so all we're doing is fixing the problem for IPython and a few other corner people). My impression is that <something>-before-def is going to be The Syntax(tm), but Guido is content to let <something> be something other than '@'. If that's the case, then I'm not sure what all the alternate placement syntaxes are being proposed for. If that's not the case, then I'll start lobbying harder for <something>-after-def (although not ""@")... ;-) -- Nick
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