Alan G Isaac wrote:
I actually trust that the developers had good
reasons for this change, but I think it is
silly to argue that it is costless.
Guido ever argued that.
The question is, what is the cost-benefit trade-off?
Uniformity of language, flexibility, and removal of the >> hack that
Guido hated after adding. Check the pydev discussions.
One obvious cost is that working at the
interpreter prompt is now slightly less
convenient.
But neither 'print' nor 'print()' is needed at the interpreter prompt.
> Just because the cost is small
does not mean it should not be offset by a
benefit.
I am less sympathetic to the suggestion that
there is an inconvenience when working in
an editor, but clearly some people find one.
That is the only time 'print' or 'print()' is needed.
I find it a minor nuisance also, but then I should learn to touch-type
() better anyway for all the other uses.
My preferred transition would have been to
retain the `print` statement but add a `printf`
function (i.e., the new `print` function).
Presumably many would find this a repulsive
redundancy and a needless maintenance headache.
Yes.
tjr
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
