[Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

skip@pobox.com skip at pobox.com
Sat Sep 3 23:02:19 CEST 2005

    >> Nope, but there is a large body of code out there that does use print
    >> statements already.  Again, I know you're prepared for breakage, but
    >> that doesn't necessarily mean a completely blank sheet of paper.

    Neal> Ideally I very much prefer that print become a function.  However,
    Neal> the major backlash has swayed me some, if for no other reason that
    Neal> people are so strongly against changing it.

I think from Guido's perspective the print statement is a wart.  From my
perspective I see it as a case of if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  I'll
adapt to a print function easily enough.  The breakage just seems

    Neal> What if a tool existed that did the conversion?  I realize that
    Neal> the tool is unlikely to be perfect, but what if it could do 99.9%
    Neal> of the job?  I'm not thinking about just fixing print, but also
    Neal> converting iterkeys/itervalues/iteritems, xrange -> range,
    Neal> raw_input -> input, warning about use of input(), etc.

That's a different subject altogether, especially if you are talking about
more than just converting print.  It should probably have its own subject
and thread.  I don't know what's in the "etc" part, but I've never used
iter-this-n-that (their names have always seemed ugly enough that I've
simply avoided them) or raw_input, I rarely use xrange, and the conversion
is trivial, so the only potential benefit for me would be print, which I can
probably get 90% of the way there with a couple Emacs macros.


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list