[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals CandD . .. .
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals CandD . .. .
- From: "Bollinger, John C" <John.Bollinger@STJUDE.ORG>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 15:17:55 -0600
- Accept-Language: en-US
- acceptlanguage: en-US
- In-Reply-To: <226444.99064.qm@web87009.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
- References: <AANLkTimWpd1kMZDGcTprEhcJw+uQE4_JtgJ4SbtMPVXt@mail.gmail.com><263453.61027.qm@web87016.mail.ird.yahoo.com><alpine.BSF.2.00.1101070742350.2950@epsilon.pair.com><4D271B81.2050501@rcsb.rutgers.edu><8F77913624F7524AACD2A92EAF3BFA54166D7D1E97@SJMEMXMBS11.stjude.sjcrh.local><901365.19577.qm@web87011.mail.ird.yahoo.com><226444.99064.qm@web87009.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
On Friday, January 07, 2011 1:50 PM, SIMON WESTRIP wrote: >If the main purpose of the python proposal is to eliminate the possibility of >not being able to delimit a string, then perhaps the answer is simply to adopt >an inherent line-folding protocol for treble-quoted values, reducing the >escape sequences to > >c) \(newline) (represents nothing; that is, it is consumed and ignored) >d) \\ (represents a single backslash (same as \u0062)) > >as in John's scheme? Simon, you have out-minimalized me. Those elides alone are indeed enough to allow triple-quote delimiters to be escaped, provided that they are applied after lexing, as my proposal specifies. I don't see how we can get any lighter-weight than that in the Python-like set of proposals. I would be willing to support that if the group doesn't see value in including \uxxxx and \Uxxxxxxxx forms. I would also be willing to support James's Proposals C and A, and I would support his proposal B if he dropped the [uU] sigil (thus making Unicode escapes a general feature of triple-quoted strings). I am not sure how I would rank these relative to each other and to my own proposal. >At least this line-folding protocol has a precedence? I don't see what you mean, unless it's my rule (4) that the elides are processed after lexical analysis / tokenization. John -- John C. Bollinger, Ph.D. Department of Structural Biology St. Jude Children's Research Hospital Email Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer _______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list ddlm-group@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- References:
- [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C and D (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C and D (SIMON WESTRIP)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C and D (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C and D (John Westbrook)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. . (Bollinger, John C)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. . (SIMON WESTRIP)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. . (SIMON WESTRIP)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .. .. .
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals C andD. .
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Eliding in triple-quoted strings: Proposals CandD . .. .
- Index(es):