> On 31 October 2012 10:38, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote:
>> with-statements have a syntactic quirk, which I think would be useful to fix.
>> This is true in Python 2.7 through 3.3, but it's likely not fixable until 3.4,
>> unless of course it's a bug <wink>.

>> Legal:

>>>>> with open('/etc/passwd') as p1, open('/etc/passwd') as p2: pass

>> Not legal:

>>>>> with (open('/etc/passwd') as p1, open('/etc/passwd') as p2): pass

>> Why is this useful?  If you need to wrap this onto multiple lines, say to fit
>> it within line length limits.  IWBNI you could write it like this:

>>      with (open('/etc/passwd') as p1,
>>            open('/etc/passwd') as p2):
>>            pass

>> This seems analogous to using parens to wrap long if-statements, but maybe
>> there's some subtle corner of the grammar that makes this problematic (like
>> 'with' treating the whole thing as a single context manager).

>> Of course, you can wrap with backslashes, but ick!

> No need for backslashes, just put the brackets in the right place:

>      with (
>              open('/etc/passwd')) as p1, (
>              open('/etc/passwd')) as p2:
>         pass

> ;)