> I wasn't aware you can create nested lists with this syntax, already.
> If I understand correctly your patch will disallow a first comma,
forcing a dot
> Will it force the comma as second separator?
No. The errors you get for 1.1 are because 1.1 is a real number. If
you write those 1 . 1 (not sure whether you can omit one or the other
space) they will work fine as well. Enforcing stuff beyond the first
dot/comma would make the grammar more complex and I don't see that we'd
accomplish anything by that. It's possible if it irritates people but
would then also sacrifice \part.2,3 . I don't know whether that would
ever be a problem, though.
First separator for subassignments must be '.'
This pares down syntax supported since issue 4790 to match the allowed
usage from issue 4797. Permitting ',' here seemed particularly
On 2018/10/03 16:56:27, thomasmorley651 wrote:
> Even without your patch one can do:
Oh, I forgot: "even without your patch" points to a misunderstanding.
The sole purpose of this patch is to remove a previously accepted
construct for assignment because, well, I was troubled by a discussion
pointing out that it was accepted (though only in assignment, not in
It doesn't seem either practically nor conceptually useful, there was no
discussion when I implemented it as part of another patch, and it seems
like a mistake to me now that I did so.