[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Benjamin Peterson added the comment: I rejecting, mostly to avoid feature creep. (This shouldn't be too difficult to accomplish with a shell script.) You could also look at 3to2. -- resolution: -> rejected status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Giampaolo Rodola' added the comment: > it's not really the point of 2to3 to port apps to 2.6. +1 -- nosy: +giampaolo.rodola ___ Python tracker ___ __

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Daniel Stutzbach added the comment: Well, I grant you that it's a bit of scope-creep, and if you want to reject it on those grounds I can't blame you. To me it seems like a relatively small change that would greatly help people like myself who want to update older code so that it will run und

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Benjamin Peterson added the comment: 2010/9/1 Daniel Stutzbach : > > Daniel Stutzbach added the comment: > > Excluding the future fixer would only get me half of the way there.  I would > still need to add "from __future__ import print_statement" to all of my > scripts if I want them to conti

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Daniel Stutzbach added the comment: Excluding the future fixer would only get me half of the way there. I would still need to add "from __future__ import print_statement" to all of my scripts if I want them to continue to work under 2.6. (Well, for me personally, I have already done exactly

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Benjamin Peterson added the comment: I don't think this is very useful. You could just as well exclude the future fixer completely. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Daniel Stutzbach added the comment: I don't think I'm familiar enough with 2to3's pattern-matching syntax to write a good patch. Here's a rough outline for how a patch would work. There are two cases: 1) When there is already a "from __future__ import". Currently, this line is stripped by

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Mark Lawrence added the comment: @Daniel there's far chance of this happening if you could provide a patch. -- nosy: +BreamoreBoy versions: -Python 2.7 ___ Python tracker ___ __

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Changes by Dirkjan Ochtman : -- nosy: +djc ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.or

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

Changes by Georg Brandl : -- assignee: -> benjamin.peterson nosy: +benjamin.peterson ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list maili

[issue7141] 2to3 should add from __future__ import print_statement

New submission from Daniel Stutzbach : I'm in the process of converting several Python scripts so that they work under both Python 2.6 and 3.1. For the most part, 2to3 does an amazing job. Great tool. One little feature request: could we make it add "from __future__ import print_statement" to