[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-09-02 Thread Giampaolo Rodola'
Giampaolo Rodola' g.rod...@gmail.com added the comment: it's not really the point of 2to3 to port apps to 2.6. +1 -- nosy: +giampaolo.rodola ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue7141

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-09-02 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment: I rejecting, mostly to avoid feature creep. (This shouldn't be too difficult to accomplish with a shell script.) You could also look at 3to2. -- resolution: - rejected status: open - closed

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-09-01 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment: I don't think this is very useful. You could just as well exclude the future fixer completely. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue7141

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-09-01 Thread Daniel Stutzbach
Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com added the comment: Excluding the future fixer would only get me half of the way there. I would still need to add from __future__ import print_statement to all of my scripts if I want them to continue to work under 2.6. (Well, for me

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-09-01 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment: 2010/9/1 Daniel Stutzbach rep...@bugs.python.org: Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com added the comment: Excluding the future fixer would only get me half of the way there.  I would still need to add from __future__

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-09-01 Thread Daniel Stutzbach
Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com added the comment: Well, I grant you that it's a bit of scope-creep, and if you want to reject it on those grounds I can't blame you. To me it seems like a relatively small change that would greatly help people like myself who want to update

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-08-31 Thread Daniel Stutzbach
Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com added the comment: I don't think I'm familiar enough with 2to3's pattern-matching syntax to write a good patch. Here's a rough outline for how a patch would work. There are two cases: 1) When there is already a from __future__ import.

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-08-03 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
Changes by Dirkjan Ochtman dirk...@ochtman.nl: -- nosy: +djc ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue7141 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2010-08-03 Thread Mark Lawrence
Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk added the comment: @Daniel there's far chance of this happening if you could provide a patch. -- nosy: +BreamoreBoy versions: -Python 2.7 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2009-10-15 Thread Daniel Stutzbach
New submission from Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com: I'm in the process of converting several Python scripts so that they work under both Python 2.6 and 3.1. For the most part, 2to3 does an amazing job. Great tool. One little feature request: could we make it add from

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

2009-10-15 Thread Georg Brandl
Changes by Georg Brandl ge...@python.org: -- assignee: - benjamin.peterson nosy: +benjamin.peterson ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue7141 ___