On Dec 23, 4:30 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lie a écrit : > > > PPS: Actually, what makes a tuple is both the parens and the comma, > > Nope, it's definively the comma. You can check the language's grammar, > it's part of the doc. Or just test FWIW: > > Python 2.4.3 (#1, Mar 12 2007, 23:32:01) > [GCC 3.3.4 20040623 (Gentoo Linux 3.3.4-r1, ssp-3.3.2-2, pie-8.7.6)] on > linux2 > Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. > >>> a = 1, > >>> type(a) > <type 'tuple'> > >>> > > > with comma as the minimum signifier, inspect this: "str(a) + > > str((a,b,c))", you have to use the double parens, one to make the > > tuple and the other as part of the str. > > This is a problem of operator precedence.
I think some people have misunderstood me, I know parens isn't a formal definition for tuples, but it's more or less a de facto grammar, as it is hard to create parens-less tuples without the interpreter mistaking it for other things, except for a few cases. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
