python 3's adoption
Adam Tauno Williams
awilliam at opengroupware.us
Wed Jan 27 21:28:34 CET 2010
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 18:52 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> * Steve Holden:
> > Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> > [...]
> >> The main problem with the incompatibility is for porting code, not for
> >> writing code from scratch. It's also a problem wrt. learning the
> >> language. And I see no good reason for it: print can't really do more,
> >> or less, or more conveniently (rather, one has to write a bit more now
> >> for same effect).
> > Of course it can do more: it allows you to layer your own print
> > functionality into the system much more easily than you could with the
> > print statement.
> Yeah, point. Very minor though. :-)
So you get to determine that?
I'd call the whole print thing (a) a legitimate change to increase
consistency and (b) a fairly minor porting nuisance since application
code [as in big-chunks-o-code] almost never contains print statements.
I know at least two shops that have scripts they run on all Python code,
prior to it entering production, to ensure there are no print
More information about the Python-list