New Python 3.0 string formatting - really necessary?
lists at cheimes.de
Fri Dec 19 19:15:52 CET 2008
> I was actually looking forward to 3.0, but the more I hear about 3.0,
> the more I am turned off. I think there are a lot of other
> pythonista's and pythoneers out there who agree but are not saying
> anything. This syntax for string formatting is completely ridiculous.
No, it's very powerful and used in other languages, too.
> What is the purpose of breaking backward compatibility just to write a
> print() function. This is going to push people away from python.
The purpose of a print() function has been discussed for at least 3
years. You are welcome to read up all dicussions.
> I heard map is going away too, is that true also??, and there was talk at one time(serious talk from
> Guido) about removing lambda functions. Is this planned for the
Wrong and wrong.
map stays but it has been turned into an iterator. The removal of lambda
has been discussed several years ago but it was repulsed. lambda stays.
> Python has been beautifully designed from the beginning. But, I feel a
> shift from this now. Are they scared of Ruby, if they are, why the
> hell should they be. We do not need to lose any of the great
> pythonista's right now, and we damn sure don't want to turn off the
> new recruits.
Python 3.0 is even more beautiful and more Pythonic. Backward
compatibility was broken for the sake of the language.
> It seems like most of the backward breaks are really just for dumb
> reasons(sorry but its true). What is the logic behind this? The whole
> reason for not having a print function was the need to use it so much
> in debugging. And I was actually going to overlook that until I saw
> this perl/ruby like format method. WTF!
Your truth turns to be a totally different truth than mine -- and most
of the active member of the community.
More information about the Python-list