On Saturday, March 10, 2012 11:56:03 H. S. Teoh wrote: > On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 02:31:53PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > [...] > > > writefln is still there with the same old functionality (which is > > good, it *is* a good function). It's just that writeln has been added > > and just happens to be better in every way for the majority of > > use-cases. > > [...] > > Strange, I still find myself using writef/writefln very frequently. > When you want formatting in your output, printf specs are just sooo > convenient. But perhaps it's just a symptom of my having just emerged > from the C/C++ world. :-)
It's a question of what you're printing out. Is it more typical to write a string out without needing to construct it from some set of arguments, or is it more common to have to print a string that you've constructed from a set of arguments? It all depends on your code. There's no question that writef and writefln are useful. It's just a matter of what _your_ use cases are which determines whether you use writeln or writefln more. - Jonathan M Davis