[Python-Dev] PEP, take 2: Exception Reorganization for Python 3.0
bcannon at gmail.com
Wed Aug 3 19:44:30 CEST 2005
On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum at gmail.com> wrote:
> So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> on the blackboard? :-).
> Start with Brett's latest proposal.
Including renaming (I want to know if you support the renamings at
all, if I should make them more of an idea to be considered when we
get closer to Python 3.0, or just drop them) and the new exceptions?
> Goal: keep bare "except:" but
> change it to catch only the part of the hierarchy rooted at
Why the change of heart? Backwards-compatibility? Way to keep
newbies from choosing Raisable or such as what to catch?
> - Call the root of the hierarchy Raisable.
Fine by me. Will change it before I check in the PEP tonight.
> - Rename CriticalException to CriticalError
> (this should happen anyway).
I thought I changed that in the latest version. I will change it.
> - Rename ControlFlowException to ControlFlowRaisable
> (anything except Error or Exception).
No objection from me.
> - Rename StandardError to Exception.
So just ditch StandardError, which is fine by me, or go with Nick's v2
proposal and have all pre-existing exceptions inherit from it? I
assume the latter since you said you wanted bare 'except' clauses to
> - Make Warning a subclass of Exception.
> I'd want the latter point even if the rest of this idea is rejected;
> when a Warning is raised (as opposed to just printing a message or
> being suppressed altogether) it should be treated just like any other
> normal exception, i.e. StandardError.
Since warnings only become raised if the warnings filter lists it as
an error I can see how this is a reasonable suggestion. And if bare
'except' clauses catch StandardError and not Exception they will still
propagate to the top unless people explicitly catch Exception or lower
which seems fair.
More information about the Python-Dev