Thinking about "print >>"

[Opinderjit]

Creating a new keyword "write" might break existing code, mine anyways.
I have used the following:

try:
   write = open(somefile).write
except IOError:
   write = sys.stdout.write

write("Hello World!")

In article <39C657ED.8CC8AEA8 at gol.com>,
  Arno Paehler <paehler at gol.com> wrote:
> talking about Fortran, how about 'print' and 'write', i.e.
>
> print something		goes to sys.stdout
> write file, something	goes to file
>
> think this is (sort of) standard Fortran,
>
> C'ish fprint isn't bad either, but at least 'print >>'
> probably is better than C++ (was that cout << or cout >>,
> C++ is quite-counterintuitive here I think)
>
> "Michael D. Marchionna" wrote:
> >
> > Wouldn't it just plain be simpler to create a new builtin with a
> > different
> > name that takes a file object as its first argument.  Just call it
> > 'fprint', or
> > 'printf', or 'fprintf', or even 'format' for FORTRAN nostalgia sake.
> > Any of
> > these would accomplish the goal without the pointless syntax games.
> >
> > This is the first time I've run across a python idiom that I truly
> >  find
> > embarassing.
> >
> > --MDM
> >
> >
> > William Carrel wrote:
> >
> > > Just to further beat a dead horse... I've submitted a patch to
> > > SourceForge which
> > > corrects the currently perl like syntax for printing to a file.
> > >
> > > The syntax accepted by the patch is as follows:
> > >
> > > print [to <file> [,]] [<item> (item ',')* [,]]
> > > i.e.
> > > print to sys.stderr "Spammity spam, glorious spam!"
> > >
> > > The comma after the 'to file' portion to make the following
> > > construct work:
> > > print to file, []
> > >
> > > Since "print to file []" is a vain attempt to index the list/dict
> > > 'file'.
> > >
> > > The patch is at
> > > http://sourcefo
> > > rge.net/patch/?func=detailpatch&patch_id=101439&group_id=5470
> > >
> > > No, 'to' is not treated as a keyword elsewhere.  Yes, if you have
a
> > > variable
> > > named 'to' its value is unaffected by this, and it should matter
> > > anyway since
> > > if you wanted to print to and something else, you'd use "print to,
> > >  file,".
> > >
> > > And hopefully someone will give it a look over I think the syntax
is
> > > much more
> > > consistant with the overall spirit of Python than this hackish
> > > looking
> > > rightshift stuff.
> > >
> > > --
> > >  Andy Carrel
> > >  CVS Repo-man ** Go2Net Web Operations Group
>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.