Douglas S. Blank wrote:
Kirby,
As a teacher, I don't have time to argue over on python-dev what should and should not be included in the language. And don't want to! I am thinking of our "petition nonsense" as a data point for those people that do take the time over on python-dev to figure out the best thing to do next, and I'll trust them.
It seemed to at least a few people on the list that python-dev'ers may not have fully considered the ramifications of this particular change in regards to teaching. We simply want to let them know about this oversight. John has written probably the best-selling textbook for intro Python; if he is concerned, then they should at least take a second look at it (whatever "it" might be.)
I think this is a good idea; this entire discussion will be rather useless if no one on py-dev or py3k sees it. You don't have to necessarily speak for everyone or for edu-sig, except to note that many people want both input() and raw_input(), and point people at the discussion, and let the discussion progress however it does. The py-dev/py3k lists have a limited audience with a very specific perspective and set of interests, and outside perspectives are useful. Maybe not always appreciated, but at least useful ;) I don't think the email has to be perfect. Maybe change "consensus" to "fairly wide agreement", send it off as you wrote it, and then you and edu-sig can let it go from there without further comment. [I suspect that input() in its current form will not remain, but raw_input() may, but it entirely depends on whether anyone expresses interest in it] -- Ian Bicking | ianb@colorstudy.com | http://blog.ianbicking.org