[issue22145] in parser spec but not lexer spec
Changes by Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com: -- resolution: - not a bug status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue22145 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue22145] in parser spec but not lexer spec
Changes by Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com: -- stage: - resolved ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue22145 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue22145] in parser spec but not lexer spec
New submission from François-René Rideau: As another follow up to http://bugs.python.org/issue21972 is mentioned in the parser spec: https://docs.python.org/3.5/reference/grammar.html But not in the lexer spec: https://docs.python.org/3.5/reference/lexical_analysis.html Either is a mistake. I suggested in issue 21972 that the former was the bug, because it referred to a joke PEP and because doesn't actually work as a comparator in Python 3.4. The response by loewis was that the parser documentation was correct — well then the lexer documentation is incorrect. -- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 224856 nosy: François-René.Rideau, docs@python, loewis priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: in parser spec but not lexer spec type: enhancement versions: Python 3.5 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue22145 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue22145] in parser spec but not lexer spec
Martin v. Löwis added the comment: Neither nor. is a conditional token, conditional on the prior future import. This is the nature of PEP 236: some syntax might be part of the language in one module, but not in another, in the same version of the language. In general, the documentation should refer to future syntax as such (i.e. mention that it is available only if a future import was made). Not so in this case: this specific feature is deliberately undocumented (or: under-documented, given that nothing is truly undocumented in free software). It's an easter egg - you found it. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue22145 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
