Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> added the comment: Thanks for the Rietveld upload. I haven't had a chance to review this properly yet, but hope to do so within the next few days.
One question: the production list you added to the docs says: format_string: (`byte_order_specifier`? `type_string`)* This suggests that format strings like '<' and '<>b' are invalid; is that correct, or should the production list be something like: format_string: (`byte_order_specifier` | `type_string`)* ? Whether these cases are valid or not (personally, I think they should be), we should add some tests for them. '<' *is* currently valid, I believe. The possibility of mixing native size/alignment with standard size/alignment in a single format string makes me a bit uneasy, but I can't see any actual problems that might arise from it (equally, I can't imagine why anyone would want to do it). I wondered briefly whether padding has clear semantics when a '@' appears in the middle of a format string, but I can't see why it wouldn't have. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3132> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
