On 4/25/2011 1:21 PM, Rob Cliffe wrote:
>>> type (3.)
>>> 3..__class__
>>> type(3)
>>> 3.__class__
File "", line 1
3.__class__
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
Superficially the last example ought to be legal syntax (and return
).
You are a more sophisticated parser than Python, which is l
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:21 AM, Rob Cliffe wrote:
type (3.)
>
3..__class__
>
type(3)
>
3.__class__
> File "", line 1
> 3.__class__
> ^
> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>
> Superficially the last example ought to be legal syntax (and return 'int'>).
> Is it an
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Rob Cliffe wrote:
..
3.__class__
> File "", line 1
> 3.__class__
> ^
> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>
> Superficially the last example ought to be legal syntax (and return 'int'>).
If it was valid, then
>>> 3.e+7
would have to raise an attr
>>> type (3.)
>>> 3..__class__
>>> type(3)
>>> 3.__class__
File "", line 1
3.__class__
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
Superficially the last example ought to be legal syntax (and return
).
Is it an oversight which could be fixed in a straightforward way, or are
there reaso
