[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't find either the trailing comma or >> redirection ugly. If I have a
> long print line that's hard to read because it extends past column 80 (the
> print statement, not the output), it's easy to hit NL at an intermediate
> comma, then just type "print ", perhaps followed by another output
> redirector. The two print statements' output still falls on a single
> line. The trailing comma on the previous line gives me a space between the
> two output chunks.
But that would be just as easy with a print() function. In the current syntax:
print 'foo:', foo, 'bar:', bar, 'baz:', baz,
print 'frobble', frobble
In my proposed function:
print('foo:', foo, 'bar:', bar, 'baz:', baz,
'frobble', frobble)
To my (admittedly biased) eyes, the second version more obviously
prints to a single line.
STeVe
--
You can wordify anything if you just verb it.
--- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
_______________________________________________
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
