Hallöchen! "Paul F. Dubois" <paul at pfdubois.com> writes: > [...] > > We scientists still use these for debugging. We never 'move on' > very far from the tutorial. The salient feature about print > statements is that they live to be put in and commented out 10 > minutes later, without some import being required or other > enabling object being around. Being a natural scientist myself, I plan to use Python for such purposes, too, and surely print will be part of it. I also agree that at least for the not professionally trained programmer, print is a very handy debugging helper. However, an even more important kind of Python programs are the utilities one creates for making life easier. They are usually short and simple with respect to their I/O. I really love the print statement with its comma notation here. Typically it's used frequently in my programs and produces lucid lines of code. Additionally, print is positive for Python advocacy in my opinion. It strengthens the beginner's impression that Python has a gentle syntax. (Again, I may speak for the non-CS folks.) I think that print's purpose is important enough for Python's target group that it deserves to remain as it is. Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus ICQ 264-296-646
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