On Mar 6, 2004, at 12:42 PM, Bernhard Herzog wrote: > Bob Ippolito <bob at redivi.com> writes: > >> On Mar 6, 2004, at 12:17 PM, Bernhard Herzog wrote: >> >>> Bob Ippolito <bob at redivi.com> writes: >>> >>>> This proposed new syntax is: >>>> >>>> funcdef: 'def' NAME parameters ['[' exprlist ']' ] ':' suite >>>> >>>> classdef: 'class' NAME ['(' testlist ')'] ['[' exprlist ']'] ':' >>>> suite >>> >>> Why are the decorators an exprlist while the base classes are a >>> testlist? >> >> The testlist is the list of base classes.. In both cases, the >> decorators are an '[' exprlist ']' > > That much was obvious enough :). What I meant was: Why are the > decorators an exprlist and not a testlist? The base classes are a test > list and the elements of a list-literal that (listmaker in Grammar) are > effectively a testlist too, so it's not obvious why the decorators > should not also be a testlist. Oh, sorry.. haven't had my coffee yet. In that case, I'm not sure. This is mwh's implementation, I'm sure there was a reason. -bob
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