On 10/16/07, David A. Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In Python 2.6, could some print FUNCTION be added to the builtins, using a > different name than "print" but with the Python 3000 semantics? Call it > printfunc or whatever. > > Python 3000 is undergoing much pain so that print can become a function. How > about making those benefits available sooner than 3.0, so that we can use > them earlier? Obviously people can create their own such function, but > having a STANDARD name for it would mean that 2to3 could easily automate that > translation. Plus, it'd help people get used to the idea of a printing > _function_.
I expect this will happen. At the very least, you'll be able to just use 'print' for that function's name if you include from __future__ import print_function at the top of your module. Whether it's worth it to make the same function available under a different name that doesn't require such an import I'm not sure. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
