Guido van Rossum wrote: > > 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
Neal Norwitz wrote: > There's a patch for this too. http://bugs.python.org/issue1633807 Excellent! I like the "from __future__..." approach better than what I'd originally proposed. If that is the plan for Python 2.6 (and I hope it is), can I appeal to someone to modify PEP 3105 to specifically _note_ that this is a planned addition for 2.6? Just a sentence or two would do it, e.g.: "Python 2.6 will include a 'from __future__ import print_function', which enables use of print as a function with these semantics instead of the traditional Python 2 print statement.". A note in some other materials about Python 2->3 transition would be nice too. Also... will the 2to3 tool support this? What I mean is, if 2to3 sees "from __future__ import print_function", will it leave print function calls alone? If not, could that be changed? Thanks. --- David A. Wheeler _______________________________________________ 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
