Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: Why not allow empty code blocks?
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 21:49:09 +1000
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <mailman.44.1469879353.6033.python-list@python.org>
References: <b80ae0ca-d8b2-4430-96a1-7a6768b177ef@googlegroups.com> <5792cd34$0$1587$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <87vazwppxx.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <CAPTjJmotJBomzHRR4bY04mVFwgMWAUp_7HDhJyd2v+jHYmnGjQ@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.74.1469273692.22221.python-list@python.org> <nmvt9g$nj6$1@dont-email.me> <CAPTjJmqjaLOZLiBHG2ADrsHmOwdAsEfAHQ1vDwDpMTM+GU=zzg@mail.gmail.com> <579B1ABB.1070500@rece.vub.ac.be> <nngbk6$vce$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.36.1469821397.6033.python-list@python.org> <nngdns$um1$1@dont-email.me> <579c2095$0$22142$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <nnhuni$op$1@dont-email.me> <CAPTjJmq7caLKiimgEt_HbhSNcyv+c6_+8sF_odcGx6yoCUjizA@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.43.1469877947.6033.python-list@python.org> <c6df24e3-3f4f-43be-be18-bc9eaa91606b@googlegroups.com> <CAPTjJmoD-wPKL6uysEdWACV0v0W+PzBHK-w31Wr2AJfEPNtmAw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <c6df24e3-3f4f-43be-be18-bc9eaa91606b@googlegroups.com>
Precedence: list
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:112055

On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 9:39 PM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 4:56:01 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 8:15 PM, BartC wrote:
>> > Anyway, if you're going to talk about annoying things forced upon you =
by the
>> > language, what about:
>> >
>> > "()" in "print (x)" for Python 3the modulo operator
>>
>> Why are you singling out print? It's just a function like any other.
>> Are you complaining about the way function calls need parentheses?
>
> Its a function=E2=80=A6 ok.
> Its =E2=80=98just=E2=80=99 a function=E2=80=A6 Arguable
>
> For example:
>
> - Prior Art: Its builtin and special in Fortran, Pascal, Basic

And it's not built-in or special in C, or a bunch of other languages.

> - More immediate : It was a special in python2

Which resulted in unmitigatable problems, such as that you can't mock
it for testing or redirection purposes, and it demands syntactic magic
to do its work - for instance, the only option is a "soft space" in
place of a newline, where the print function allows full customization
of both end=3D and sep=3D. The print function is DEFINITELY an
improvement. I would also posit that an sprintf() built-in function
instead of str.__mod__ would have meant there was less kickback
against printf-style formatting, because it wouldn't have had the
strange behaviour around single-argument use. (It's pretty simple to
write, of course, but built-ins are extremely significant to
perception. def sprintf(fmt, *args): return fmt % args) Syntax is NOT
always an improvement.

> - Poorer error catching: What was a straight syntax error is now a lint-c=
atch (at best)
>   [print (x) for x in range(20)]

Huh? Aside from the fact that you're constructing a useless list of
Nones, what's the error?

Also: Why is print special here? Maybe you accidentally called
frobnicate on those x's and you shouldn't have. How is Python supposed
to know that that's an error?

ChrisA