(original) (raw)

If you track this more closely, you'll notice there are four issues (surprises) from the user point of view:

1\. print() buffers output on Python3

2\. print() also buffers output on Python2, but only on Linux

3\. there is some useless '-u' command line parameter

    (useless, because the last thing user wants is not only care about Python 2/3, but also how to invoke them)

4\. print() is not guilty - it is sys.stdout.write() that buffers output

1-2 discussion was about idea to make new print() function behavior more 'pythonic', i.e. 'user-friendly' or just KISS, which resulted in adding a flush parameter

3 is a just a side FYI remark

4 doesn't relate to python-ideas anymore about fixing print() - it is about the \*cause\* of the problem with print() UX, which is underlying sys.stdout.write() behavior

I asked 4 here, because it is the more appropriate place not only to ask if it can be/will be fixed, but also why. The target audience of the question are developers.

All four "issues" are related to output buffering and how that is not user-friendly. The new issue you raise is the same as before: sys.stdout is line buffered when writing to a tty, which means that you have to explictly flush output when you want to output a partial line.  Why is this a problem for you? Is that something that bothers you personally or do you have data that suggests that this is a problem for a significant amount of (new) users?

Ronald