Terry J. Reedy added the comment:
Benjamin, is the idea even feasible, or should this be closed?
--
versions: +Python 3.3, Python 3.4 -Python 3.1, Python 3.2
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10375
Benjamin Peterson added the comment:
Probably, but I'm not going to do it.
2013/11/4 Terry J. Reedy rep...@bugs.python.org:
Terry J. Reedy added the comment:
Benjamin, is the idea even feasible, or should this be closed?
--
versions: +Python 3.3, Python 3.4 -Python 3.1, Python
Terry J. Reedy added the comment:
I'll close this then, as it will never happen.
--
resolution: - rejected
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10375
___
Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment:
[Copied from Issue10070.]
which is to say (for the benefit of other reviewers):
This was a minor sub-issue mentioned there in passing and independent of the
main issue and ignored in the extensive discussion thereof.
--
nosy:
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
nosy: +benjamin.peterson, eric.araujo
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10375
___
___
New submission from Hallvard B Furuseth h.b.furus...@usit.uio.no:
Could 2to3 without -p notice more cases of print(single argument),
to avoid slapping another () around them? For example:
print(2*3)
print(, .join(dir))
print(very + long
+ single + argument)
My internal bug
