Terry Reedy wrote:
> "Fredrik Lundh" <fredrik at pythonware.com> wrote in message
> news:dveini$ntv$1 at sea.gmane.org...
>>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1184112&group_id=5470&atid=105470
>> "When compiling multi-line statements, two caveats apply: line
>> endings must be represented by a single newline character ('\n'),
>> and the input must be terminated by at least one newline character."
>
> Relevant part of quote added to bug report.
One quirk though, is that omitting the newline actually works for some other
statements (e.g. exec "if 1:\n print 'Hello world!'" works just fine)
However, I don't think the quote is as relevant as one might think, because in
the code that fails the multi-line statement is not only terminated by a
newline, it's actually followed by a blank line as well. The line missing the
newline is only a single-line statement (specifically, a line with only a
comment).
Compare:
Py> exec """
... if 1:
... print 'This works!'
...
... pass # Do nothing at all"""
This works!
With:
Py> exec """
... if 1:
... print 'This breaks!'
...
... # Do nothing at all"""
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
File "<string>", line 5
# Do nothing at all
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
There's an easy workaround (adding the missing newline), but I think there's
definitely something going wrong in the tokenizer.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
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