[Mailman-Developers] Re: [Mailman-Users] LogMsg problem
Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:52:47 -0500 (EST)
On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
> TP> It seems that, in general, the use of LogMsg is inconsistent.
> You're right about that. It would be a good thing to clean up the use
> of LogMsg. I usually do the substitution before passing it to LogMsg,
> but some of the older code does it the other way.
> TP> Any opinions about whether this is
> TP> a good idea, whether it will work, or whether there is a
> TP> better way to approach this problem?
> | try:
> | logf.write(msg % args + '\n')
> | except:
> | logf.write(msg + '\n')
> Just a point of Python style. It's almost never appropriate to use a
> "bare" except like this because it can mask unexpected exceptions. In
> this case using "except TypeError" would do the trick.
ok, thanks for the tip.
> This is probably okay as a stopgap, but it would be better to make the
> use of LogMsg more consistent.
it wouldn't be a big job. there are only about 50 occurrences of LogMsg
calls in all files under the Mailman python directory, and of these, only
about 20 seem to have '%' substitution characters in the msg argument:
grep LogMsg * | grep '%' | wc
the ones that pass an arg tuple would simply have to be changed so that
the ',' between the msg and args arguments is a '%' to do the
substitutions before the call. then, remove the '%' substitution in
Todd Pfaff \ Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Computing and Information Services \ Voice: (905) 525-9140 x22920
ABB 132 \ FAX: (905) 528-3773
McMaster University \
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8S 4M1 \