[Edu-sig] The fate of raw_input() in Python 3000

Arthur ajsiegel at optonline.net
Wed Sep 6 20:24:09 CEST 2006

John Zelle wrote:

>On Wednesday 06 September 2006 8:00 am, Arthur Siegel wrote:
>>Being dispassionate on the issue itself - I have *never* used
>>raw_input() and, as it happens, I am generally literate enough at this
>>point so that the intentions of sys.stdin.readline is *clearer* to me
>>than is raw_input() - I am disturbed by the tone of the discussion.
>>Guess I prefer the all-in-the-family temper tantrum, then the calm and
>>dispassionate threat - explicit or implicit.
>I have no idea what you mean here. Speaking only for myself, I am simply 
>stating that a language that requires me to use an extended library to do 
>simple input is less useful as a teaching tool than one that does not. I also 
>gave arguments for why, as a programmer, I find it less useful.  You have not 
>addressed those arguments.
/I think I have.

In the decorator discussion on python-list I became the self-appointed 
founder and chairman of the CLA - Chicken Little Anonymous.  Which was 
some self-deprecation in connection with my role in the int/int and 
case-sensitivity ddiscussions.  And allowing me some freedom to 
adamantly voice my opinions on the introduction of decorators - I was 
adamantly against - while letting it be known that I thought Python 
would well survive the outcome, whatever it ended up being.

My opinion here is that you are probably right in some senses, probably 
wrong in others - and that Python will be not be *significantly* less 
useful for pedagogical purposes, whatever the outcome of the issue. 

So I choose to speak to the tone of the discussions as more to the 
substance of the issue, than is the substance of the tissue itself.  And 
as the more important issue.

A strange role to find myself in, sure enough.



More information about the Edu-sig mailing list