Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

[Torsten Bronger]

Hallöchen!

"Paul F. Dubois" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> [...]
>
> We scientists still use these for debugging. We never 'move on'
> very far from the tutorial. The salient feature about print
> statements is that they live to be put in and commented out 10
> minutes later, without some import being required or other
> enabling object being around.

Being a natural scientist myself, I plan to use Python for such
purposes, too, and surely print will be part of it.  I also agree
that at least for the not professionally trained programmer, print
is a very handy debugging helper.

However, an even more important kind of Python programs are the
utilities one creates for making life easier.  They are usually
short and simple with respect to their I/O.  I really love the print
statement with its comma notation here.  Typically it's used
frequently in my programs and produces lucid lines of code.

Additionally, print is positive for Python advocacy in my opinion.
It strengthens the beginner's impression that Python has a gentle
syntax.  (Again, I may speak for the non-CS folks.)

I think that print's purpose is important enough for Python's target
group that it deserves to remain as it is.

Tschö,
Torsten.

-- 
Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetusICQ 264-296-646

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] status of development documentation

[Torsten Bronger]

Hallöchen!

"A.M. Kuchling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 05:10:24PM +0100, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
>
>> (as I hinted, I'd prefer HTML with microformat annotations as the
>> main format; with roundtripping to markdown or rest (etc) for
>> people who prefer to author in that, and tidy->xhtml->python
>> tools for the HTML generation)
>
> I don't see how HTML can be used to support printed versions of the
> docs (e.g. PostScript, PDF).

I've used XSLT heavily for converting XML/XHTML to PDF.  It was
pretty easy, and the result was of very high typographic quality.
The only disadvantage is that XSLT is *slow*.

My standard approach was to convert XML to LaTeX and to substitute
all unicodes with LaTeX commands.  Thus, the depenencies are LaTeX,
an XSLT processor (Saxon), and a tiny program for the substitutions.
(The latter can be avoided by LaTeX's Unicode package; however,
expect problems in some cases.)

> [...]  Are there any HTML-to-print converters that are better?

I don't understand exactly how the HTML is to be used for Python but
I assume that not everything could be done via CSS, so own
converters will be necessary for perfect output.  Alternatively, you
can use XSLT so that the browser can convert the original document
to a printable document (with table of contents, index etc).  For
perfect typography you need LaTeX though.

> reST is a possibility, though I don't think anyone has worked on
> building the required toolchain.

I used reST last spring for a small package project.  Although I
love its goals (reST as well as Wiki languages are a perfect
"front-end" for the XML family), I was disappointed with its rather
small semantic vocabulary.  I felt forced to use visual markup
tricks and things like that.  If nothing significant has changed, I
think that reST is too young for a really big project.

Tschö,
Torsten.

-- 
Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetusICQ 264-296-646

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com