gratuitous new features in 2.0

[Grant Griffin]

Johann Hibschman wrote:
> 
> Tim Peters writes:
> 
> > [Grant Griffin]
> 
> >> *BTW, what's wrong with ">" for redirect?  Heck, anything that both DOS
> >> and Unix do can't be _all_ bad! <wink>
> 
> > To both Unix and DOS users, ">" implies overwrite and ">>" implies append.
> > The print semantics are much closer to the latter.  Ditto to the meaning of
> > ">>" in C++ in an output context.  Using ">" instead would *really* be
> > gratuitous novelty.
> 
> True, ">" implies overwrite in sh, but I at least think of it as the
> more general "send this stuff to this place" operator, since I'm
> rarely appending to files.  I suspect this is fairly normal.
> 
> sh needs ">>" to distinguish append from the normal overwrite; python
> print is clearly not overwriting anything, so we can use the simpler
> default of ">".
> 
> It's also much less visually heavy than ">>", and I think this basic
> prettiness outweighs the analogy to sh.  (Although '->' is nifty,
> too!)

Yup.  I had forgotten the particulars, but I think that's where I was
coming from in endorsing ">": as you suggest, it's less ugly, easier to
pronounce <wink>, and it seems to suggest "send stuff".

(instead-of:-"send-stuff-via-federal-express"
   / -"chill-dude---take-a-decaf!"-<wink>)-ly y'rs,

=g2
-- 
_____________________________________________________________________

Grant R. Griffin                                       g2 at dspguru.com
Publisher of dspGuru                           http://www.dspguru.com
Iowegian International Corporation	      http://www.iowegian.com