[Python-Dev] Challenge about print >> None

Tim Peters tim_one@email.msn.com
Thu, 14 Sep 2000 17:28:22 -0400

[Vladimir Marangozov]
> Nobody is condemned when receptive. You're inflexibly persistent here.

I'm terse due to lack of both time for, and interest in, this issue.  I'm
persistent because Guido already ruled on this, has explicitly declined to
change his mind, and that's the way this language has always evolved.  Had
you hung around Python in the early days, there was often *no* discussion
about new features:  they just showed up by surprise.  Since that's how
lambda got in, maybe Guido started Python-Dev to oppose future mistakes like
that <wink>.

> Remove the feature, discuss it, try providing arguments so that we can
> agree (or disagree), write the PEP including a summary of the discussion,
> then decide and add the feature.

It was already very clear that that's what you want.  It should have been
equally clear that it's not what you're going to get on this one.  Take it
up with Guido if you must, but I'm out of it.

> In this particular case, I find Guido's attitude regarding the "rules of
> the game" (that you have fixed, btw, PEPs included) quite unpleasant.
> I speak for myself. Guido has invited me here so that I could share
> my opinions and experience easily and that's what I'm doing in my spare
> cycles (no, your agenda is not mine so I won't look at the bug list).

Then understand that my agenda is Guido's, and not only because he's my
boss.  Slashing the bug backlog *now* is something he believes is important
to Python's future, and evidently far more important to him than this
isolated little print gimmick.  It's also my recollection that he started
Python-Dev to get help on decisions that were important to him, not to
endure implacable opposition to every little thing he does.

If he debated every issue brought up on Python-Dev alone to the satisfaction
of just the people here, he would have time for nothing else.  That's the
truth.  As it is, he tells me he spends at least 2 hours every day just
*reading* Python-Dev, and I believe that, because I do too.  So long as this
is a dictatorship, I think it's impossible for people not to feel slighted
at times.  That's the way it's always been, and it's worked very well
despite that.

And I'll tell you something:  there is *nobody* in the history of Python who
has had more suggestions and "killer arguments" rejected by Guido than me.
I got over that in '93, though.  Play with him when you agree, back off when
he says "no".  That's what works.

> If you think I'm doing more harm than good, no problem. I'd be happy
> to decline his invitation and quit.

In general I think Guido believes your presence here is extremely helpful.
I know that I do.  On this particular issue, though, no, continuing to beat
on something after Guido says "case closed" isn't helpful.

> I'll be even more explit:
> There are organizational bugs in the functioning of this micro-society
> that would need to be fixed first, IMHO. Other signs about this have
> been expressed in the past too. Nobody commented.

People have been griping about the way Python is run since '91, so I'm not
buying the idea that this is something new.  The PEP process *is* something
new and has been of very mixed utility so far, but is particularly
handicapped at the start due to the need to record old decisions whose
*real* debates actually ended a long time ago.

I certainly agree that the way this particular gimmick got snuck in violated
"the rules", and if it were anyone other than Guido who did it I'd be
skinning them alive.  I figure he's entitled, though.  Don't you?

> Silence can't rule forever. Note that I'm not writing arguments for
> my own pleasure or to scratch my nose. My time is precious enough, just
> like yours.

Honestly, I don't know why you've taken your time to pursue this repeatedly.
Did Guido say something to suggest that he might change his mind?  I didn't
see it.

> ...
> Open your eyes, though.

I believe they're open, but that we're seeing different visions of how
Python *should* be run.

> pre-release-pressure-can-do-more-harm-than-it-should'ly ly

We've held a strict line on "bugfixes only" since 2.0b1 went out the door,
and I've indeed spent many an hour debating that with the feature-crazed
too.  The debates about all that, and all this, and the license mess, are
sucking my life away.  I still think we're doing a damned good job, though

over-and-out-ly y'rs  - tim