<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/9/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">joe user</b> <<a href="mailto:signspointtoprobably@yahoo.com">signspointtoprobably@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div style="direction: ltr;"><pre>Does this mean you have no more actual technical reasons to oppose this change, but are just stomping your foot and implying bad things about Winter? Because there are people who agree with him, and I haven't seen any really compelling reasons to avoid this ten-line modification.
</pre></div></blockquote><div>Well, I shan't speak for Guido, but I haven't seen a compelling reason to change the existing exception class, either. The exception *class* will never explicit enough, it will never reflect all the specific details about the error. You always need the actual error message to determine that. If it's really necessary to be able to 'parse' an exception, adding attributes to the instance to indicate what the problem seems to be is a more scalable approach, IMHO, but I don't really see the need myself.
<br><br>I've had many, many newbies come along complaining about the TypeError that woudl become an ArgumentError, and never, ever, were they confused about the fact that it was a TypeError. They were always confused about "expected three, got four" when the functioncall clearly showed three arguments (it was a methodcall, of course.) Why change the class? What other classes should be changed? How fine-grained should it be? The effort, regarless of how small it is, is in my opinion wasted. (As is all the effort in discussing this, including this message :-)
<br></div></div><br>-- <br>Thomas Wouters <<a href="mailto:thomas@python.org">thomas@python.org</a>><br><br>Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!