There is/was a long discussion about the replacement for print in Python 3.0 (I don't know if this discussion is finished): http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/055968.html
There is also a wiki page that collects the ideas: http://wiki.python.org/moin/PrintAsFunction There is the will to keep the printing operation very simple for the most common situation, but at the same time to make it flexible (optional no space between printed items, newline, redirection to file, etc), such requirements can collide. Another problem is to avoid backward compatibility problems in the source code. I post my idea here because I think I'm not fit for the python-dev mailing list yet. I hope posting this here is okay. A printing operation as a function requires the (), but I think there can be little advantages (but not many advantages, the print statement is acceptable for me still), so I agree to make it a function. Name: I think print() and printnl() can be fine names for the two functions, but this can give problems, so other names can be: write/writenl, show/shownl, echo/echonl, put/putnl, emit/emitnl, say/saynl I think the write/writenl or show/shownl namas are the best (writeln instead of writenl is acceptable too, I think). Spacing problem: I can solve this problem with the solution used in the Pascal language, that is to not print the space between items. Here are some examples, from the PrintAsFunction page: # Standard printing print 1, 2, 3 shownl(1, " ", 2, " ", 3) # Printing without any spaces print "%d%d%d" % (1, 2, 3) shownl(1, 2, 3) # Print as comma separated list print "%d, %d, %d" % (1, 2, 3) shownl(1, ", ", 2, ", ", 3) # Print without a trailing newline print 1, 2, 3, show(1, " ", 2, " ", 3) # Print to a different stream print >> sys.stderr, 1, 2, 3 shownl(1, " ", 2, " ", 3, to=sys.stderr) # Print a simple sequence print " ".join(map(str, range(10))) shownl( " ".join(map(str, range(10))) ) # Print a generator expression print " ".join(str(x*x) for x in range(10)) shownl( " ".join(str(x*x) for x in range(10)) ) It's not very nice looking, but it's simple, and it avoids problems and the use of the "sep" parameter. This is the alternative that uses the sep: # Print without a trailing newline print 1, 2, 3, show(1, 2, 3) # Printing without any spaces print "%d%d%d" % (1, 2, 3) shownl(1, 2, 3, sep='') # Print as comma separated list print "%d, %d, %d" % (1, 2, 3) shownl(1, 2, 3, sep=', ') # Print a simple sequence print " ".join(map(str, range(10))) shownl(*range(10)) I think the % string formatting used in Python can be fine for the C language (and ), but I have to look its syntax each time I use it ("%" character + Mapping key (optional) + Conversion flags (optional) + Minimum field width (optional) + Precision (optional) + Length modifier (optional) + Conversion type), and I think a simpler solution (fit for the most common usage) can be found for a high level langage like Python (I can say something similar about the syntax to define the base of integer numbers, the use of the trailing 0 for the octals isn't good). Bye, bearophile -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list