Re: Invalid identifier claimed to be valid by docs (methinks)

2012-09-24 Thread Joshua Landau
On 24 September 2012 03:42, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 9/23/2012 6:57 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > >> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Joshua Landau >> wrote: >> >>> The docs describe identifiers to have this grammar: >>> >>> identifier ::= xid_start xid_continue* >>> id_start ::= >> Lo, >>> Nl,

Re: Invalid identifier claimed to be valid by docs (methinks)

2012-09-23 Thread Terry Reedy
On 9/23/2012 6:57 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Joshua Landau wrote: The docs describe identifiers to have this grammar: identifier ::= xid_start xid_continue* id_start ::= id_continue ::= xid_start::= xid_start is a subset of id_start xid_continue

Re: Invalid identifier claimed to be valid by docs (methinks)

2012-09-23 Thread Joshua Landau
On 23 September 2012 23:57, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Joshua Landau > wrote: > > The docs describe identifiers to have this grammar: > > > > identifier ::= xid_start xid_continue* > > id_start ::= Lo, > > Nl, the underscore, and characters with the Other_ID_Sta

Re: Invalid identifier claimed to be valid by docs (methinks)

2012-09-23 Thread Ian Kelly
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Joshua Landau wrote: > The docs describe identifiers to have this grammar: > > identifier ::= xid_start xid_continue* > id_start ::= Nl, the underscore, and characters with the Other_ID_Start property> > id_continue ::= categories Mn, Mc, Nd, Pc and oth