>> Nope, but there is a large body of code out there that does use print >> statements already. Again, I know you're prepared for breakage, but >> that doesn't necessarily mean a completely blank sheet of paper.
Neal> Ideally I very much prefer that print become a function. However, Neal> the major backlash has swayed me some, if for no other reason that Neal> people are so strongly against changing it. I think from Guido's perspective the print statement is a wart. From my perspective I see it as a case of if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I'll adapt to a print function easily enough. The breakage just seems unnecessary. Neal> What if a tool existed that did the conversion? I realize that Neal> the tool is unlikely to be perfect, but what if it could do 99.9% Neal> of the job? I'm not thinking about just fixing print, but also Neal> converting iterkeys/itervalues/iteritems, xrange -> range, Neal> raw_input -> input, warning about use of input(), etc. That's a different subject altogether, especially if you are talking about more than just converting print. It should probably have its own subject and thread. I don't know what's in the "etc" part, but I've never used iter-this-n-that (their names have always seemed ugly enough that I've simply avoided them) or raw_input, I rarely use xrange, and the conversion is trivial, so the only potential benefit for me would be print, which I can probably get 90% of the way there with a couple Emacs macros. Skip _______________________________________________ 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