To Cameron Simpson, Thanks for your in-depth and helpful reply. I have noted it and will be giving it close attention when I can.
The main reason why I am still using Python 2.x is that my colleagues are still using a GIS system that has a Python programmer's interface - and that interface uses Python 2.x. The team are moving to an updated version of the system whose Python interface is Python 3.x. However, I am expecting to retire over the next 8 months or so, so I do not need to be concerned with Python 3.x - my successor will be doing that. Stephen. On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 2:07 PM Cameron Simpson <c...@cskk.id.au> wrote: > On 28Apr2022 12:32, Stephen Tucker <stephen_tuc...@sil.org> wrote: > >Consider the following log from a run of IDLE: > >================== > > > >Python 2.7.10 (default, May 23 2015, 09:40:32) [MSC v.1500 32 bit (Intel)] > >on win32 > >Type "copyright", "credits" or "license()" for more information. > >>>> print (u"\u2551") > >║ > >>>> print ([u"\u2551"]) > >[u'\u2551'] > >>>> > >================== > > > >Yes, I am still using Python 2.x - I have good reasons for doing so and > >will be moving to Python 3.x in due course. > > Love to hear those reasons. Not suggesting that they are invalid. > > >I have the following questions arising from the log: > >1. Why does the second print statement not produce [ ║] or ["║"] ? > > Because print() prints the str() or each of its arguments, and str() of > a list if the same as its repr(), which is a list of the repr()s of > every item in the list. Repr of a Unicode string looks like what you > have in Python 2. > > >2. Should the second print statement produce [ ║] or ["║"] ? > > Well, to me its behaviour is correct. Do you _want_ to get your Unicode > glyph? in quotes? That is up to you. But consider: what would be sane > output if the list contained the string "], [3," ? > > >3. Given that I want to print a list of Unicode strings so that their > >characters are displayed (instead of their Unicode codepoint definitions), > >is there a more Pythonic way of doing it than concatenating them into a > >single string and printing that? > > You could print them with empty separators: > > print(s1, s2, ......, sep='') > > To do that in Python 2 you need to: > > from __future__ import print_function > > at the top of your Python file. Then you've have a Python 3 string print > function. In Python 2, pint is normally a statement and you don't need > the brackets: > > print u"\u2551" > > but print() is genuinely better as a function anyway. > > >4. Does Python 3.x exhibit the same behaviour as Python 2.x in this > respect? > > Broadly yes, except that all strings are Unicode strings and we don't > bothing with the leading "u" prefix. > > Cheers, > Cameron Simpson <c...@cskk.id.au> > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
