Ian Kelly wrote:
I must concur. The grammar as written does not actually produce 1 + not 0. I think it's still worthwhile opening a bug, because the behavior is surprising and possibly not intentional.
It's almost certainly intentional. If you want not a + b > c to be interpreted as not (a + b > c) rather than (not a) + b > c then 'not' has to be higher up in the chain of grammar productions than the arithmetic operations. Maintaining that while allowing 'a + not b' would require contortions in the grammar that wouldn't be worth the very small benefit that would be obtained. -- Greg -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
