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
statements.




More information about the Python-list mailing list