On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:50:10 +0100, Eric Jacoboni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I've seen at least one language (forget which one) that allowed such >> separators, but only for groups of three. So 123_456 would be valid, >> but 9_1 would be a syntax error. > >Ada allows underscores in numeric literals since 1983, without >enforcing any grouping. The Ruby language allows also this >notation. You may write 1_000_001 or 1000_001 or 10_00_001, etc. (the >same for real numbers...). > Actually, I guess I could be convinced, even though I posted a you-can-do-this-now decorator to bracket the op's desired function defs. >When you have the habit to represent literals like that, all other >big numeric literals or workarounds to create grouping seem cryptic. > >-- >Eric Jacoboni, ne il y a 1435938104 secondes My previous smiley re your sig in this thread context still applies ;-) Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
