[Python-3000] how should we handle changes to the C API?
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Mon Feb 12 23:55:21 CET 2007
But I only want the latter in Py3k, and I don't mind using a different
API there, even potentially a separate check after evaluating 'E' but
before checking whether it matches.
I think it's fine not to catch this in 2.6; after all it's a bug
anyway so we're not expecting many occurrences. I don't think the 3.0
mode in 2.6 needs to catch existing bugs; it only needs to catch code
that *works* in 2.6 but won' in 3.0.
On 2/12/07, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On 2/11/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> > Brett Cannon schrieb:
> > > Right, but I wanted to be able to raise a warning. If that warning is
> > > supposed to be treated as an exception the caller needs to let that
> > > propagate. RIght now PyErr_GivenExceptionMatches() can in no way let
> > > the caller know that fact
> > I'm unclear why you want to warn in PyErr_GivenExceptionMatches:
> > shouldn't you rather warn when the exception is raised?
> Guido wants both so that you don't end up with useless values in the
> 'except' clause. So yes, things are checked at the time of raising an
> exception, but that does not prevent someone from putting something in
> an 'except' clause that is useless.
> Python-3000 mailing list
> Python-3000 at python.org
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/guido%40python.org
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
More information about the Python-3000