So can be done with this syntax: > x = firstpart * secondpart + #line breaks here > anotherpart + #continue > stillanother #continue on.
after a "+" operator the line is clearly not finished yet. Gabriel AHTUNE 2011/9/2 Matt Joiner <anacro...@gmail.com> > I guess the issue here is that you can't tell if an expression is > complete without checking the indent of the following line. This is > likely not desirable. > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Yingjie Lan <lany...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Hi Matt, > > ======================================================= > > From: Matt Joiner <anacro...@gmail.com> > > > > The "trailing \" workaround is nonobvious. Wrapping in () is noisy and > > already heavily used by other syntactical structures. > > ======================================================= > > How about only require indentation > > to freely break lines? Here is an example: > > x = firstpart * secondpart #line breaks here > > + anotherpart #continue by indentation > > + stillanother #continue on. > > #until here, another line starts by dedentation > > y = some_expression - another_one > > All this would be completely compatible with former code, while > > having almost free line breaking! Plus, indentation makes it pretty. > > Really hope Python can have freedom in breaking lines. > > Yingjie > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list > python-id...@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas >
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
