On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 14:45, David Eppstein wrote: > > I agree with Paul here. The only reason I suggested | was to make life > > easier for 3rd party tools. > > But does it? > > With @, a third party tool has an unambiguous indication of whether a > line is a decorator. With |, it is not possible to recognize decorators > with a regular expression, instead you have to do some context-free > parsing to determine whether some previous line has an unclosed paren > (in which case the | is a binop rather than a decorator). Oh ick. I hadn't thought of that, but if that's going to cause a problem given the current grammar (and I can't test that atm), then I'm going to have to retract my support for |. -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 307 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20040809/265fc754/attachment.pgp
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