James J. Besemer wrote:
> I propose that we extend the semantics of "print" such that if the
> object to be printed is a generator then print would iterate over the
> resulting sequence of sub-objects and recursively print each of the
> items in order.
I don't feel like searching for the specific python-dev threads right
now, but something like this has been suggested before (I think with a
"%i" formatting code), and Guido felt strongly that the addition or
removal of a simple print statement shouldn't change the behavior of the
surrounding code.
Consider code like::
items = get_generator_or_None()
for item in items:
do_something(item)
Now let's say I insert a debugging line like::
items = get_generator_or_None()
print "make sure this isn't None:", items
for item in items:
do_something(item)
My debugging line now just broke the rest of my code. That's not good.
The other reason I don't think this PEP should go forward (at least as
it is) is that Python 3000 is already going to turn the print statement
into a function (though the exact details of that function have not been
hashed out yet). So adding extra cruft to the print statement is kind
of wasted effort.
STeVe
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
