Re: Grammar for classes

On 22 December 2011 23:39, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 12/20/2011 12:05 PM, Joshua Landau wrote: > >> Should I file a documentation bug report? >> > > Please do. It the addition means something, it needs to be explained in > the text. If it is wrong, it should go. I have filed one at issue13658

Re: Grammar for classes

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > Beats me. The 2.7 doc says inheritance ::=  "(" [expression_list] ")" and I > no on no 3.x change/addition. Well, there is one change in 3.x which is that the inheritance list now accepts keyword parameters (PEP 3115) -- the "metaclass" keywor

Re: Grammar for classes

On 12/20/2011 12:05 PM, Joshua Landau wrote: On 20 December 2011 10:55, Robert Kern mailto:robert.k...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 12/20/11 1:34 AM, Joshua Landau wrote: In reading thorough the syntax defined in the reference

Re: Grammar for classes

On 12/20/11 5:05 PM, Joshua Landau wrote: On 20 December 2011 10:55, Robert Kern mailto:robert.k...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 12/20/11 1:34 AM, Joshua Landau wrote: In reading thorough the syntax defined in the reference

Re: Grammar for classes

On 20 December 2011 10:55, Robert Kern wrote: > On 12/20/11 1:34 AM, Joshua Landau wrote: > >> In reading thorough the syntax defined in the reference >> > class-definitions

Re: Grammar for classes

On 12/20/11 1:34 AM, Joshua Landau wrote: In reading thorough the syntax defined in the reference , the class statement has surprised me. It says that the inheritance part of the class can accept comprehensions. What do

Re: Grammar for classes

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Joshua Landau wrote: > In reading thorough the syntax defined in the reference, the class statement > has surprised me. > > It says that the inheritance part of the class can accept comprehensions. > What does this mean? > I've tried: > "class A(x for x in ()): pas