Alex Martelli wrote: > What a mess it would be to disambiguate statements such as > > x = foo bar baz bat > > is it x = (foo, bar, baz, bat) > or x = foo(bar, baz, bat) > or x = foo(bar(baz), bat) > or x = foo(bar, baz(bat)) > or x = foo(bar(baz, bat))
It will be x=foo(bar,baz,bat). The parenthese ommition would only be valable for the first function call in the statement. > or ... [even ignoring the possibility that one or more of these might be > functions callable without arguments...!!!]... That won''t be a problem: "x=foo bar(baz) bat" would be equivalent to "x=foo(bar(baz),bat)". Or, but least realistic, it would be in the scheme trend. For example: a=b(c,d(e,f(g,h,i,j,k))) <==> a=b c (d e (f g h i j k)) It looks nicer, isn't it? :) > iPython has some heuristics that may be reasonable for the commandline > (and are, in any case, at least simple), but in practice I find that I > go back to using the good old interactive Python interpreter rather than > putting up with even those simple heuristics. That depends of your need to such tools. For example if you need to copy a file, then, resolve a linear system then chroot and set the password as de hexadecimal representation of the hash function of pi multiplied by the averge of the solution coordinations +_+, you'll need IPython ;) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
