Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.albasani.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1504323.jUKfeKbQsP@PointedEars.de>
References: <f7b84d9d-c559-4711-ad63-1deea5f12c62@googlegroups.com> <med6mn$ag9$6@dont-email.me> <3533816.ZYnZ2OzjCs@PointedEars.de> <mailman.51.1426995416.10327.python-list@python.org> <3971951.908YQu3oQO@PointedEars.de> <mailman.52.1426997516.10327.python-list@python.org> <1504323.jUKfeKbQsP@PointedEars.de>
From: Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 23:09:45 -0600
Subject: Re: A simple single line, triple-quoted comment is giving syntax error. Why?
To: Python <python-list@python.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.181.1427346636.10327.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 49
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:88026

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
>> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>>>> Implicit concatenation is part of the syntax, not part of the expressi=
on
>>>> evaluator.
>>> Reads like nonsense to me.
>>
>> What do you mean?
>
> As I showed, string literals and consecutive tokens of string literals
> (=E2=80=9CSTRING+=E2=80=9D) so as to do implicit concatenation *are* expr=
essions of the
> Python grammar.  Expressions are *part of* the syntax of a programming
> language.
>
> Perhaps you mean that the time when implicit concatenation is evaluated
> (compile time) differs from the time when other expressions are evaluated
> (runtime).  But a) whether that is true depends on the implementation and
> b) there can be no doubt that either expression needs to be evaluated.  S=
o
> whatever you mean by =E2=80=9Cexpression evaluator=E2=80=9D has to be abl=
e to do those
> things.
>
> Which makes the statement above read like nonsense to me.

What the grammar that you quoted from shows is that STRING+ is an
expression. The individual STRINGs of a STRING+ are not expressions,
except to the extent that they can be parsed in isolation as a
STRING+. By the same token, a STRING+ is a single string literal, not
an aggregate of several.

Ancillary data point:

>>> help(ast.literal_eval)
    Safely evaluate an expression node or a string containing a Python
    expression.  The string or node provided may only consist of the follow=
ing
    Python literal structures: strings, bytes, numbers, tuples, lists, dict=
s,
    sets, booleans, and None.
>>> ast.literal_eval('"foo" "bar"')
'foobar'

So the ast.literal_eval also treats this as one literal expression.