On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 5:53:12 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > >> > - Poorer error catching: What was a straight syntax error is now a > >> > lint-catch (at best) > >> > [print (x) for x in range(20)] > >> > >> Huh? Aside from the fact that you're constructing a useless list of > >> Nones, what's the error? > > > > Huh² > > > > Are you seriously suggesting that python-3’s behavior below is better IN > > THIS INSTANCE than python-2’s? > > > > [That there may be other reasons that outweigh this one for > > print-as-function > > is not something I am disputing. I was solely disputing your ‘just’] > > > > Python 2.7.12 (default, Jul 1 2016, 15:12:24) > >>>> [print(x) for x in range(10)] > > File "<stdin>", line 1 > > [print(x) for x in range(10)] > > ^ > > SyntaxError: invalid syntax > >>>> > > > > Python 3.5.2 (default, Jul 5 2016, 12:43:10) > > > >>>> [print(x) for x in range(10)] > > 0 > > 1 > > 2 > > 3 > > 4 > > 5 > > 6 > > 7 > > 8 > > 9 > > [None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None] > >>>> > > I still don't understand your complaint. How is this "better/worse > error checking"? All you're showing me is the same line of code you > showed above, plus what it does in Py2 and Py3, which I know already. > You haven't explained why this is such a great feature in Py2 that got > lost in Py3. > > And hey. If you want to print out the numbers 0 through 9, Py3 offers > a pretty concise way to spell that: > > >>> print(*range(10), sep='\n')
Heh Cute! Thanks!! > 0 > 1 > 2 > 3 > 4 > 5 > 6 > 7 > 8 > 9 > >>> > > Beat that, print statement. What makes you think I wanted to print those numbers?? Maybe I wanted a list of 10 None-s?? Point being that when one mixes up 2 things like that its anybody’s guess which is the primary (central) effect and which the ‘side’ effect -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
