On Jun 30, 9:06 pm, Steven D'Aprano <steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 00:05:26 +0200, Thomas Jollans wrote: > > Yes. My sole point, really, is that "normally", one would expect these > > two expressions to be equivalent: > > > a < b < c > > (a < b) < c > > Good grief. Why would you expect that? > > You can't just arbitrarily stick parentheses around parts of expressions > and expect the result to remain unchanged. Order of evaluation matters: > > 2**3**4 != (2**3)**4
Yes but as Chris points out in the next message, you can inject the following parenthesis without changing a thing!: py> 1 + 3 * 4 13 py> 1 + (3 * 4) 13 Of course i understand the rules of operator precedence, however i have never liked them AND i continue to believe that such functionality breeds bugs and is in fact bad language design. I believe all evaluations should be cumulative: py> 1 + 3 * 4 should ALWAYS equal 16! With parenthesis only used for grouping: py> a + (b*c) + d Which seems like the most consistent approach to me. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
