[Python-3000] Is this really a SyntaxError?

[Amaury Forgeot d'Arc]

2008/7/30 Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 2:34 AM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc
> <amauryfa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I hope this patch is simple enough for you:
>>
>> Index: Grammar/Grammar
>> ===================================================================
>> --- Grammar/Grammar     (revision 65298)
>> +++ Grammar/Grammar     (working copy)
>> @@ -113,7 +113,9 @@
>>
>>  classdef: 'class' NAME ['(' [arglist] ')'] ':' suite
>>
>> -arglist: (argument ',')* (argument [',']| '*' test [',' '**' test] | '**' test)
>> +arglist: (argument ',')* (argument [',']
>> +                         |'*' test (',' NAME '=' test)* [',' '**' test]
>> +                         |'**' test)
>>  argument: test [comp_for] | test '=' test  # Really [keyword '='] test
>>
>>  comp_iter: comp_for | comp_if
>>
>>
>> (and call pgen to rebuild the graminit.c)
>>
>> Positional arguments after the *args are explicitly disallowed:
>>        f(1, *[2, 3], 4, z=5)
>> The syntax could make sense, but this would require more changes in
>> the compiler,
>> to properly order the parameters.
>
> Are you saying that after the above Grammar change, the code generator
> already does the right thing for Raymond's code?

Yes! the ast builder simply collects items from the parenthesized sequence,
and does not care about the ordering - except for an explicit
"non-keyword arg after keyword arg".

> Then I say go for it
> -- but please do add new unit tests.

Of course -- I was just requesting approval.
I am working on a documentation patch as well, and filed
http://bugs.python.org/issue3473

-- 
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc