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

Ian Bicking ianb at colorstudy.com
Fri Sep 8 18:01:47 CEST 2006

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 at colorstudy.com | http://blog.ianbicking.org

More information about the Edu-sig mailing list