Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.freenet.ag!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.002 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'string': 0.09; 'etc).': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject:question': 0.10; 'python': 0.11; 'suggest': 0.14; '24,': 0.16; 'janssen': 0.16; 'kern': 0.16; 'lexer': 0.16; 'lexical': 0.16; 'notation.': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'undefined.': 0.16; 'underlying': 0.16; 'language': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'discussion': 0.18; 'bit': 0.19; "python's": 0.19; 'seems': 0.21; '>>>': 0.22; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; 'interpret': 0.24; 'necessary.': 0.24; 'mon,': 0.24; 'defined': 0.27; 'header:X -Complaints-To:1': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'am,': 0.29; 'robert': 0.30; 'specified': 0.30; 'code': 0.31; 'there.': 0.32; 'probably': 0.32; 'quite': 0.32; 'url:python': 0.33; 'there': 0.35; 'url:org': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'recent': 0.39; 'does': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:org': 0.40; 'simply': 0.61; 'our': 0.64; 'places': 0.64; 'world': 0.66; 'believe': 0.68; 'analysis': 0.75; 'eco': 0.84; 'terrible': 0.84; 'url:reference': 0.84; '2013': 0.98 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Robert Kern Subject: Re: n00b question on spacing Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 12:19:20 +0100 References: <24094189.2779.1371851333304.JavaMail.rgacote@ip-225.appropriatesolutions.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.1.240.226 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 29 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1372159166 news.xs4all.nl 15893 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:56699 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:49145 On 2013-06-25 01:22, Mark Janssen wrote: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:48 PM, alex23 wrote: >> On 23/06/2013 3:43 AM, Mark Janssen wrote: >>> >>> There was a recent discussion about this (under "implicit string >>> concatenation"). It seems this is a part of the python language >>> specification that was simply undefined. >> >> >> It's part of the language reference, not an accidental artifact: >> http://docs.python.org/2/reference/lexical_analysis.html#string-literal-concatenation > > When I say "specification", I mean "specified in the formal notation" > (BNF, etc). There is quite a bit of Python's lexical analysis that is specified in places other than the formal notation. That does not mean it is undefined. It is well defined in the lexer code and the documentation. You suggest that a "rule probably should be added to the lexer to make this explicit." That is not necessary. The rule is already there. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco