[Python-Dev] a quit that actually quits

[Alex Martelli]

On Dec 28, 2005, at 3:24 AM, Michael Hudson wrote:

> skip at pobox.com writes:
>
>>     Fredrik> a quit/exit command that actually quits, instead of  
>> printing a
>>     Fredrik> "you didn't say please!" message.
>>
>> I like Fredrik's idea more and more.
>
> The thing that bothers me about it is that the standard way you tell
> python to do something is "call a function" -- to me, a special case
> for exiting the interpreter seems out of proportion.

Just brainstorming, but -- maybe this means we should generalize the  
idea?  I.e., allow other cases in which "just mentioning X" means  
"call function Y [with the following arguments]", at least at the  
interactive prompt if not more generally.  If /F's idea gets  
implemented by binding to names 'exit' and 'quit' the result of some  
factory-call with "function to be called" set to sys.exit and  
"arguments for it" set to () [[as opposed to specialcasing checks of  
last commandline for equality to 'exit' &c]] then the implementation  
of the generalization would be no harder.  I do find myself in  
sessions in which I want to perform some action repeatedly, and  
currently the least typing is 4 characters (x()<enter>) while this  
would reduce it to two (iPython does allow such handy shortcuts, but  
I'm often using plain interactive interpreters).

If this generalization means a complicated implementation, by all  
means let's scrap it, but if implementation is roughly as easy, it  
may be worth considering to avoid making a too-special "special  
case" (or maybe not, but brainstorming means never having to say  
you're sorry;-).


Alex