[Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0 (original) (raw)

Barry Warsaw barry at python.org
Mon Sep 5 04:17:25 CEST 2005

On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 22:06, James Y Knight wrote:

No, we certainly don't /need/ printf(), as is well proven by its current absence. Having the operation of printing and the operation of string formatting be separated is good, because it means you can easily do either one without the other. I don't understand why you want to combine these two operations. If it's % you object to, then propose a fix for the actual problem: e.g. a "fmt" function for formatting strings. (Which I would also object to, because I don't believe % is a problem). But proposing "printf" just adds complication for no purpose. It leaves % as a "problem" and adds a new builtin which duplicates existing functionality.

You can definitely argue about keeping formatting and print separate, but I think Guido and others have explained the problems with %. Also, we already have precedence in format+print in the logging package. I actually think the logging provides a nice, fairly to use interface that print-ng can be modeled on.

-Barry

-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 307 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20050904/87571f50/attachment.pgp

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list