[DB-SIG] Optional DB API Extensions

M.-A. Lemburg mal@lemburg.com
Wed, 24 Oct 2001 19:19:50 +0200

"Dittmar, Daniel" wrote:
> > From: M.-A. Lemburg [mailto:mal@lemburg.com]
> > The reasoning here is that I believe it should be possible
> > to request e.g. that all Warnings be raised as excpetions
> > or to have them only be stored in the .messages lists
> > or to completely silence them.
> How does this differ from the warning framework in Python 2.1?

The warning framework is meant for source code warnings, not application
run-time warnings. I was talking about making the error reporting
in DB API modules customizable using (optional) error handlers.
> I think the important part is that the warning text (or part of the warning
> text) is defined in the PEP for each optional feature, thus allowing to
> compare the warnings for Driver A with the features of driver B.

Now this is much better: if all you want is some notice whenever
an optional feature is used, then the warning framework in Python 2.1
would work just fine for this and yes, defining a standard warning
text is certainly a good approach.

However, I wouldn't want to make usage of the warning framework
manditory for all DB API modules. It would be an optional feature just
like all the other extensions I placed on the list.

Does that sound reasonable ? 

Marc-Andre Lemburg
CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH
Consulting & Company:                           http://www.egenix.com/
Python Software:                        http://www.lemburg.com/python/