On 19 Dic, 17:01, walterbyrd <walterb...@iname.com> wrote: > I have not worked with Python enough to really know. But, it seems to > me that more I look at python 3.0, the more I wonder if it isn't a > step backwards. > > To me, it seems that this: > > print "%s=%d" % ('this',99) > > Is much easier, and faster, to type, and is also easier to read and > understand. It also allows people to leverage their knowledge of C. > > This (if it's right) is much longer, and requires more special > characters. > > print( "{0}={1}".format('this',99)) > > Maybe it's worth all the extra trouble, and breaking backward > compatibilty, and all. But, I never had the idea that the old way was > all that big a problem. Of course, I could be wrong. Was the old way > all that big of a problem?
You can use the old 2.x syntax also in Python 3.x: C:\>C:\python30\python.exe Python 3.0 (r30:67507, Dec 3 2008, 20:14:27) [MSC v.1500 32 bit (Intel)] on win 32 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> print("%s=%d" % ('this',99)) this=99 --- Giampaolo http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list