On Mon, May 2, 2016, at 11:14, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:01 AM, Ryan Gonzalez <rymg19@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Other than the fact that this would completely fail when run with -O...
> >
> But maybe that's fine, or intended.
>
> I can see a fair number of uses for this, including subclasses of
> AssertionError.

I think this would be an attractive nuisance, and if it's implemented at
all it should forbid types that are *not* subclasses of AssertionError
in order to mitigate that.