Author theacodes
Recipients FFY00, pablogsal, steven.daprano, theacodes, tlalexander, veky
Date 2021-07-12.13:08:45
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
I don't think we should completely write off the possibility of doing this just because the *current* implementation is counter-intuitive. As I expressed in the original post, the explanation of this behavior is rather unsatisfying to newcomers.

Also @steven.daprano, please do not confuse one recommendation for implementation for the concept.

I agree that printing the Quitter object should not exit the interpreter. However, I disagree that "exit" should not be a special case. Specifically, when using the interactive interpreter the behavior (regardless of implementation strategy) would ideally be:

>>> exit
(interpreter exit)
>>> exit()
(interpreter exit)
>>> print(exit)
Call "exit()" to quit Python. When using the interactive interpreter you can simply type "exit".

This behavior closely matches IPython's behavior, and even a cursory search reveals not only individual users running into this and being frustrated, but even threads where this behavior has reached "meme status":
Date User Action Args
2021-07-12 13:08:46theacodessetrecipients: + theacodes, steven.daprano, veky, pablogsal, FFY00, tlalexander
2021-07-12 13:08:46theacodessetmessageid: <>
2021-07-12 13:08:46theacodeslinkissue44603 messages
2021-07-12 13:08:45theacodescreate