Terry Reedy wrote: > "Ron Adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >># standard printing >>write.ln(1, 2, 3) > > >># print without trailing newline >>write(1, 2, 3) > > > This violates this design principle: > When there are two options and one is overwhelmingly more common in use (in > this case, with newline added, at least 95%) the common case should be > easier, not harder.
Having write/writeln as builtins has that problem too (with writeln being more common, but having the less obvious and longer name), but that pair of functions is still what is currently recorded in PEP 3000 as the candidate replacement for the print statement. Unfortunately, giving "write" the behaviour of "writeln" would result in a confusing difference between "sys.stdout.write('Hello world!')" and "write('Hello world!')", where the latter appends a trailing newline, but the former doesn't. I figure the naming of any replacement function for the print statement is going to end up squarely in Guido's court, particularly given that the need for a workable transition strategy makes it difficult to use the most obvious name (i.e., print). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://boredomandlaziness.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com