Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #26929
| From | Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values |
| Date | 2012-08-11 20:25 -0400 |
| References | <58f60e60-1dc1-4265-a601-693d11b4bcec@googlegroups.com> <CAPTjJmp9rxwCxS5eeLq54N-csd6MyshCqSEqAjoUrzuj0XUOBg@mail.gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.3200.1344731198.4697.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 8/11/2012 7:13 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 8:30 AM, John Ladasky > <john_ladasky@sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> In [7]: 1 + not(len(L) % 2) >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> File "<ipython console>", line 1 >> 1 + not(len(L) % 2) >> ^ >> SyntaxError: invalid syntax > > This appears to be a limitation of the parser; it's trying to > interpret "not" as a binary operator. I think not. It is lower precedence than all arithmetic operators. The following is worth knowing about and occasionally reviewing. http://docs.python.org/py3k/reference/expressions.html#summary () around % is not needed; not len(L) % 2 works same. So parser sees 1 + not len(L) % 2 with + given higher precedence than not, So it parses as (1 + not) and croaks, as indicated by caret. (We humans see that that is impossible and may boost the precedence in context.) > 1 + (not(len(L) % 2)) == 1 + (not len(L) % 2) > > Works just fine with parentheses to enforce the correct interpretation. > > This also works in Python 3.2, fwiw (except that you need > list(range(5)) to create the sample list). -- Terry Jan Reedy
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Arithmetic with Boolean values John Ladasky <john_ladasky@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-08-11 15:30 -0700
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-08-12 09:13 +1000
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> - 2012-08-11 16:53 -0700
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-08-11 20:25 -0400
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-08-12 10:31 +1000
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2012-08-12 01:36 +0100
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-11 17:54 -0700
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-08-12 11:22 +0000
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-08-12 07:40 -0400
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-08-12 14:06 +0000
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-12 09:59 -0700
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Bernd Nawothnig <Bernd.Nawothnig@t-online.de> - 2012-08-12 19:21 +0200
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-12 19:20 +0100
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-08-12 14:45 -0400
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2012-08-12 20:13 +0000
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2012-08-12 20:29 -0400
Re: Arithmetic with Boolean values Hans Mulder <hansmu@xs4all.nl> - 2012-08-14 18:32 +0200
csiph-web