[Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Wed Sep 7 06:45:22 CEST 2005
On 9/6/05, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
> It's true that the majority of Python applications never need i18n,
> because they're only used in one language. But Python applications
> are mostly assembled from a large and growing set of Python-standard
> and other well-known libraries. It would be very useful to keep the
> barriers to i18n-ization as low as possible to make those libraries as
> broadly applicable as possible.
Sure, we must provide good i18n support. But the burden on users who
don't need i18n should be negligeable; they shouldn't have to type or
know extra stuff that only exists for the needs of i18n. The same is
true for many other needs of library authors and
programming-in-the-large: programming-in-the-small should come first
and foremost. We don't need another J2EE.
> You're talking about Python 3.0; I don't know if it can be done within
> a reasonable amount of effort (and if not, too bad), but in that
> planning horizon it is surely worth some effort to find a solution.
There seem to be many people interested in finding this solution; I
see it as my task (among others) to make sure that their solution
doesn't negatively affect the life of the majority of users who don't
Even if there's a class of users who think they don't need it and in
the end find they do. That's too bad, they will have to apply some
global transformation to their code. I hope that making print a
function will help make that transformation easier.
I've seen a couple of responses claiming that with good planning there
won't be a need for such transformation (and consequently they don't
need the changes I'm proposing). Well duh! I've never had perfect
foresight. If you always plan ahead for what you might need, you
inevitably end up writing an overly heavy framework. Remember YAGNI!
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
More information about the Python-Dev