On 9/5/06, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sep 5, 2006, at 2:06 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
> >> Then shouldn't rpartition be S.rpartition(sep) -> (rest, sep, tail)
> >
> > Gads, the cure is worse than the disease.
> >
> > car and
I'd like to help here on the AST branch, if it's not too late.
(Especially I'm interested with the generator expression part.)
If I want to volunteer, do I just begin to work with it? Or do I need
to read something or discuss with someone?
Thanks.
Jiwon.
On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 23:03:33 -0500, Jerem
Regarding this Grammar change; (last October)
from argument: [test '=' ] test [gen_for]
to argument: test [gen_for] | test '=' test ['(' gen_for ')']
- to raise error for "bar(a = i for i in range(10)) )"
I think we should change it to
argument: test [gen_for] | test '=' te
With parentheses, we can use "if cond then val1 else val2" form
without the burden of hacking the parser, although the cost of the
keyword "then" is still there.
so, some possible forms that prompts in my mind are
level = (if "absolute_import" in self.future then 0 else -1)
level = (if "ab
On 10/16/05, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/10/05, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There's a problem with genexp's that I think really needs to get
> > fixed. See http://python.org/sf/1167751 the details are below. This
> > code:
> >
> > >>> foo(a = i for i in range(1
On 2/6/06, Christopher Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/7/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Brett Cannon wrote:
> > > But I know that everyone and their email client is against me on this
> > > one, so I am not going to really try to tear into this. But I do
> > > thi
On 2/8/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/8/06, Patrick Collison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And to think that people thought that keeping "lambda", but changing
> > the name, would avoid all the heated discussion... :-)
>
> Note that I'm not participating in any attempts to
On 2/8/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jiwon Seo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 2/8/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 2/8/06, Patrick Collison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > And t
On 2/8/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jiwon Seo wrote:
> > Then, is there any chance anonymous function - or closure - is
> > supported in python 3.0 ? Or at least have a discussion about it?
>
> That discussion appears to be closed (or, not
