RetroSearch Browse

Wed Sep 7 00:37:26 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056258.html

Michael Chermside wrote:

> We could satisfy both people if in Python 2.x we introduced a
> built-in function named "print30" (for Python 3.0) with the intended
> new behavior. People could start coding now using the "print30"
> builtin. When Python 3.0 was released, 'print' would no longer be
> a keyword, and both 'print' and 'print30' would be built-ins that
> both refered to the same function.

-1000

It's ugly, and it doesn't help the transition whatsoever IMO. We
*definitely* don't want a print30 function hanging around in Python 3.0
for backwards compatibility with the miniscule number of people who used
it in Python 2.x.

The simplest solution is (as already stated)::

    from __future__ import __print_function__

Tim Delaney

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056258.html below:

[Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0