PEP 3105 – Make print a function
- Author:
- Georg Brandl <georg at python.org>
- Status:
- Final
- Type:
- Standards Track
- Created:
- 19-Nov-2006
- Python-Version:
- 3.0
- Post-History:
Table of Contents
Abstract
The title says it all – this PEP proposes a new print()
builtin
that replaces the print
statement and suggests a specific signature
for the new function.
Rationale
The print
statement has long appeared on lists of dubious language
features that are to be removed in Python 3000, such as Guido’s “Python
Regrets” presentation [1]. As such, the objective of this PEP is not
new, though it might become much disputed among Python developers.
The following arguments for a print()
function are distilled from a
python-3000 message by Guido himself [2]:
print
is the only application-level functionality that has a statement dedicated to it. Within Python’s world, syntax is generally used as a last resort, when something can’t be done without help from the compiler. Print doesn’t qualify for such an exception.- At some point in application development one quite often feels the need
to replace
print
output by something more sophisticated, like logging calls or calls into some other I/O library. With aprint()
function, this is a straightforward string replacement, today it is a mess adding all those parentheses and possibly converting>>stream
style syntax. - Having special syntax for
print
puts up a much larger barrier for evolution, e.g. a hypothetical newprintf()
function is not too far fetched when it will coexist with aprint()
function. - There’s no easy way to convert
print
statements into another call if one needs a different separator, not spaces, or none at all. Also, there’s no easy way at all to conveniently print objects with some other separator than a space. - If
print()
is a function, it would be much easier to replace it within one module (justdef print(*args):...
) or even throughout a program (e.g. by putting a different function in__builtin__.print
). As it is, one can do this by writing a class with awrite()
method and assigning that tosys.stdout
– that’s not bad, but definitely a much larger conceptual leap, and it works at a different level than print.
Specification
The signature for print()
, taken from various mailings and recently
posted on the python-3000 list [3] is:
def print(*args, sep=' ', end='\n', file=None)
A call like:
print(a, b, c, file=sys.stderr)
will be equivalent to today’s:
print >>sys.stderr, a, b, c
while the optional sep
and end
arguments specify what is printed
between and after the arguments, respectively.
The softspace
feature (a semi-secret attribute on files currently
used to tell print whether to insert a space before the first item)
will be removed. Therefore, there will not be a direct translation for
today’s:
print "a",
print
which will not print a space between the "a"
and the newline.
Backwards Compatibility
The changes proposed in this PEP will render most of today’s print
statements invalid. Only those which incidentally feature parentheses
around all of their arguments will continue to be valid Python syntax
in version 3.0, and of those, only the ones printing a single
parenthesized value will continue to do the same thing. For example,
in 2.x:
>>> print ("Hello")
Hello
>>> print ("Hello", "world")
('Hello', 'world')
whereas in 3.0:
>>> print ("Hello")
Hello
>>> print ("Hello", "world")
Hello world
Luckily, as it is a statement in Python 2, print
can be detected
and replaced reliably and non-ambiguously by an automated tool, so
there should be no major porting problems (provided someone writes the
mentioned tool).
Implementation
The proposed changes were implemented in the Python 3000 branch in the Subversion revisions 53685 to 53704. Most of the legacy code in the library has been converted too, but it is an ongoing effort to catch every print statement that may be left in the distribution.
References
Copyright
This document has been placed in the public domain.
Source: https://github.com/python/peps/blob/main/peps/pep-3105.rst
Last modified: 2023-09-09 17:39:29 GMT