Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!newsfeed.freenet.ag!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.032 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.94; '*S*': 0.00; 'python.': 0.02; 'guido': 0.05; 'terry': 0.09; 'jan': 0.11; '"list': 0.16; 'received:80.91': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229': 0.16; 'received:gmane.org': 0.16; 'received:list': 0.16; 'reedy': 0.16; 'statement.': 0.16; 'subject: \n ': 0.16; 'subject:Why': 0.16; 'subject:language': 0.16; 'subject:still': 0.16; 'mon,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'typing': 0.18; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.23; 'print': 0.25; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'said,': 0.27; 'statement': 0.27; 'subject: ?': 0.27; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.28; '-0700,': 0.29; 'agreed.': 0.29; "d'aprano": 0.29; 'steven': 0.29; 'to:addr :python-list': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'something': 0.36; 'said': 0.36; 'but': 0.36; 'difference': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'pm,': 0.38; 'sometimes': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'enough': 0.39; 'received:org': 0.39; 'header:Received:5': 0.39; 'simple': 0.60; 'myself': 0.61; 'first': 0.62; 'between': 0.63; 'real': 0.63; 'zip': 0.64; 'making': 0.67; 'yes': 0.69; 'fortunately': 0.84; 'habit.': 0.84; 'received:fios.verizon.net': 0.84; 'mistake': 0.91; 'regret': 0.91; 'rick': 0.91; 'subject:there': 0.91 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Terry Reedy Subject: Re: Why has python3 been created as a seperate language where there is still python2.7 ? Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 00:33:48 -0400 References: <1340509604.38915.YahooMailClassic@web164605.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4fe92df1$0$29978$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-74-109-121-73.phlapa.fios.verizon.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 In-Reply-To: <4fe92df1$0$29978$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 31 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1340685246 news.xs4all.nl 6848 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:54984 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:24456 On 6/25/2012 11:35 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > (Rick, don't make me regret communicating with you again.) > > On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 19:28:01 -0700, rantingrickjohnson wrote: > >> However, there is something to be said for "old habits die hard". I >> myself lament every time i must type->(, then blah, then->) AGAIN!. My >> fingers are hardwired for the old print statement. Damned that Guido and >> his mind games! > > There's no real difference between typing print(...) and all the other > functions in Python. Yes there is ... as Rick said, habit. I still sometimes forget ;-( > Do you lament having to type len(obj) instead of > "len obj" or list(zip(a, b, c)) instead of "list zip a b c"? No. > Making print a statement in the first place was a mistake, but > fortunately it was a simple enough mistake to rectify once the need for > backward compatibility was relaxed. Complete agreed. I have used all of sep=, end=, and file= at various times. -- Terry Jan Reedy