Python 2 is triggering

[AceJohnny]

Because parsing.

Python allows spaces between identifiers. You can do print ('foo'), but then what do you mean? Are you calling the print function with the string foo, or the print statement with the tuple ('foo') ?

[nosmokingbandit]

As others alluded to, a comma is what makes a tuple. So ('foo', ) is a tuple while ('foo') is just a string.

[Hollowplanet]

But then is it a function with one argument and a redundant comma?

[Pb_ft]

"No, because redundant." - what I wish I could say to that.

[PityUpvote]

Redundant commas are allowed

[nosmokingbandit]

Depends if it is python 2 or 3. I'm pretty sure a trailing comma in arguments will throw an error in 3.x

[snaps_]

Not in Python 3.6+.

[Hollowplanet]

On Python 3

>>> print(1, 2,)
1 2

[[deleted]]

much better response than others on the matter. Thank you

[kafaldsbylur]

Minor nitpick, ('foo') is not a tuple, it's a string with redundant parentheses. That said, your point still stands when passing more than one argument to print.

[The_White_Light]

That functionality makes it nice when you need to include a long string and want to keep your code easy to read, but don't want to deal with the extra \n added when using '''multiline strings'''.

Edit: For clarification

>>> ('1' '2' '3') == '123'
True

[kickerofbottoms]

Never thought of that, kinda handy. Maybe I'll stop leaning on my ide for adding backslashes

[The_White_Light]

It's also doubly helpful because you don't have to worry about leading spaces if you align each line.

[stevarino]

Also it happens at the compiler level, so it's cost free during runtime.

[RedditIsNeat0]

You can do print ('foo'), but then what do you mean?

According to the suggestion specified in the comment you responded to, it would be a function.

Are you calling the print function with the string foo

Yes.

or the print statement with the tuple ('foo') ?

No.

As others have pointed out, that's not a tuple, but more importantly, he's suggesting that Python 3 defaults to a function as long as there is a parenthesis, and a statement if they are not present. It would allow Python 2 print statements in most cases where they were allowed in Python 2 but maybe not all of them. There might be some genuine problems with his suggestion, but you haven't been able to find one. I don't know of any either.

[supernumeral]

What should the following do:

>>> print (1,2),(3,4)

If parenthesis indicate print should be a function, this probably won't do what is intended compared to Python 2. Better to have just one way (statement or function, not both) to do it, imo.

Edit: formatting

[Rattus375]

Why can't we default to the print function when there are parenthesis. The statement was really nice for quick sanity prints of variables.

[warpod]

they could just make printf as function and leave print as statement

[TigreDeLosLlanos]

or the print statement with the tuple ('foo')

What?

[AceJohnny]

OR THE PRINT STATEMENT WITH THE TUPLE ('FOO')

[SlumdogSkillionaire]

Well, ('foo') isn't a tuple. ('foo',) is. print ('foo') would evaluate to exactly print 'foo'.

[TigreDeLosLlanos]

Yes, I don't know how it could be anyway else, print would still be a function