Silly newbie question - Carrot character (^)

[Mark Wooding]

Steven D'Aprano <steve at REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes:

> If you want to argue that the Python reference manual is aimed at the
> wrong level of sophistication, specifically that the BNF syntax stuff
> should be ripped out into another document, then I might agree with
> you.  But to argue that it's entirely the wrong "kind" of thing is, in
> my opinion, unjustified.

I certainly wouldn't agree with that.  The language's syntax is
essential part of the language, and must be described clearly and
unambiguously.  Formal grammars aren't especially hard to understand,
and they're pretty much everywhere, so learning how to read them is an
essential skill anyway.

To be honest, I reckon the Python language reference is too friendly and
fluffy.  The manual for F#, say, is a harder read.  The Standard ML
language reference is a book full of mathematical notation (inference
rules for operational semantics, mainly) and little else.  The Scheme
language used to be described by a page or so of equations giving a
translation into lambda calculus (but now that's operational semantics
too) -- oh, there are prose descriptions too, but they're not easy going
either in places, and the formal semantics are necessary to clear up
some of the details.

You Python people have it easy.

-- [mdw]