Terry J. Reedy added the comment: The doc bug is that the grammar block uses 'integer' (linked to https://docs.python.org/3/reference/lexical_analysis.html#grammar-token-integer) in arg_name ::= [identifier | integer] element_index ::= integer | index_string when it should use 'decimalinteger' or even more exactly 'digit+'. The int() builtin uses the same relaxed rule when no base is given. >>> 011 SyntaxError: invalid token >>> int('011') 11 >>> '{[011]}'.format('abcdefghijlmn') 'm'
One possibity is to replace 'integer' in the grammar block with 'digit+' and perhaps leave the text alone. Another is to replace 'integer' with 'index_number', to go with 'index_string, and add the production "index_number ::= digit+". My though for the latter is that 'index_number' would connect better with 'number' as used in the text. A further option would be to actually replace 'number' in the text with 'index_number'. PS to Todd. As much as possible, doc content changes should be separated from re-formatting. I believe the first block of your patch is purely a re-format ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue7951> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
