From 32008321f513acc843296fb04ffa9e276157612b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Georg Brandl Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 06:12:19 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Bug #1777168: replace operator names "opa"... with "op1"... and mark everything up as literal, to enhance readability. --- Doc/reference/expressions.rst | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/Doc/reference/expressions.rst b/Doc/reference/expressions.rst index 93eb4122df3..4e95ec36306 100644 --- a/Doc/reference/expressions.rst +++ b/Doc/reference/expressions.rst @@ -1008,12 +1008,12 @@ Comparisons can be chained arbitrarily, e.g., ``x < y <= z`` is equivalent to ``x < y and y <= z``, except that ``y`` is evaluated only once (but in both cases ``z`` is not evaluated at all when ``x < y`` is found to be false). -Formally, if *a*, *b*, *c*, ..., *y*, *z* are expressions and *opa*, *opb*, ..., -*opy* are comparison operators, then *a opa b opb c* ...*y opy z* is equivalent -to *a opa b* :keyword:`and` *b opb c* :keyword:`and` ... *y opy z*, except that -each expression is evaluated at most once. +Formally, if *a*, *b*, *c*, ..., *y*, *z* are expressions and *op1*, *op2*, ..., +*opN* are comparison operators, then ``a op1 b op2 c ... y opN z`` is equivalent +to ``a op1 b and b op2 c and ... y opN z``, except that each expression is +evaluated at most once. -Note that *a opa b opb c* doesn't imply any kind of comparison between *a* and +Note that ``a op1 b op2 c`` doesn't imply any kind of comparison between *a* and *c*, so that, e.g., ``x < y > z`` is perfectly legal (though perhaps not pretty).