On 11 September 2000, Tim Peters said:
> > So as long as one uses extended print, she's already an advanced user.
>
> Nope! "Now how did I get this to print to a file instead?" is one of the
> faqiest of newbie FAQs on c.l.py, and the answers they've been given in the
> past were sheer torture for them ("sys? what's that? rebind sys.stdout to
> a file-like object? what?! etc").
But that's only an argument for "print >>file"; it doesn't support
"print >>None" == "print >>sys.stdout" == "print" at all.
The only possible rationale I can see for that equivalence is in a
function that wraps print; it lets you get away with this:
def my_print (string, file=None):
print >> file, string
instead of this:
def my_print (string, file=None):
if file is None: file = sys.stdout
print >> file, string
...which is *not* sufficient justification for the tortured syntax *and*
bizarre semantics. I can live with the tortured ">>" syntax, but
coupled with the bizarre "None == sys.stdout" semantics, this is too
much.
Hmmm. Reviewing my post, I think someone needs to decide what the
coding standard for ">>" is: "print >>file" or "print >> file"? ;-)
Greg
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4