Is python commercializationazing? [ Was Re: ANN: PyStream - a C++ stream emulation ]

[Aahz Maruch]

In article <slrn8qdfq2.2ko.thor at localhost.localdomain>,
Manuel Gutierrez Algaba <irmina at ctv.es> wrote:
>
>>> print 23 
>was the easiest way, more straight forward of doing things, easy
>too explain even to a 5 years old boy.
>(That's why sys.stdout... sucks)
>
>I'm starting to wonder if all these changes are more or less 
>a "face" wash to "sell" better python to the commercial world.
>
>I see "print >> 23,455,23 " more a kind of concession to the
>C++ world than anything else. 
>
>If so, don't "wash" too much python, it may shrink and get nasty. 

That's precisely my point of view about print.  However, it's a bad idea
to imply commercial motives to changes in Python.  While I disagree with
the extended print syntax, I do understand why Barry et al think it's
better than a function call, particularly given that the print
*statement* already exists.

Essentially, the disagreement here is about *where* to minimize the
changes to Python.  The print statement won't get removed, and there
does seem to be a consensus that print-like capabilities are wanted for
file objects other than sys.stdout.
--
                      --- Aahz (Copyright 2000 by aahz at pobox.com)

Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het    <*>     http://www.rahul.net/aahz/
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

The difference between "intelligence" and "wisdom": Londo and G'Kar  --Aahz