On Mon, Sep 28, 2015, at 17:48, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Expr( value=Attribute( value=Attribute( value=Name(id='spam'), attr='eggs', uptalk=True), attr='cheese', uptalk=False))
Hm, I think the problem is that this way of representing the tree encourages thinking that each attribute (with or without ?) can be treated on its own.
How else would you represent it? Maybe some sort of expression that represents a _list_ of attribute/item/call "operators" that are each applied, and if one of them results in none and has uptalk=True it can yield early. Something like... AtomExpr(atom=Name('spam'), trailers=[Attribute('eggs', uptalk=True), Attribute('cheese', uptalk=False)]) For a more complex example: a?.b.c?[12](34).f(56)?(78) AtomExpr(Name('a'), [ Attribute('b', True), Attribute('c', False), Subscript(12, True), Call([34], False), Attribute('f', False), Call([56], False), Call([78], True)]) I almost sent this with it called "Thing", but I checked the grammar and found an element this thing actually maps to.