On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:54 PM, MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
Under the proposal:
("a" "b")
or:
("a" "b")
would be the same as:
("ab")
but:
["a" "b"]
or:
["a" "b"]
would be a syntax error.
This would actually be fine with me. I use implicit string literal concatenation mostly within (...), and even though I've seen (and sometimes written) code like ['this is a ' 'long string', 'this is another ' 'long string'] I agree that requiring extra (...) in this case is reasonable, i.e.: [('this is a ' 'long string'), ('this is another ' 'long string')] The same would apply to other literals like {...} (for both sets and dicts), and possibly for tuples too (assuming that it's possible to figure out when a tuple is being created). I also write code like: raise SomeException('this is a long message ' 'that spans 2 lines') or even: self.assertTrue(somefunc(), 'somefunc() returned ' 'a false value and this is wrong') In these cases I wouldn't like redundant (...) (or even worse extra '+'s), especially for the first case. I also think that forgetting a comma in a list of function args between two string literal args is quite uncommon, whereas forgetting it in a sequence of strings (list, set, dict, tuple) is much more common, so this approach should cover most of the cases. Best Regards, Ezio Melotti