[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 246: LiskovViolation as a name

[Steven Bethard]

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:49:06 -0500, Phillip J. Eby
<pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> So the *only* way you can see
> this error is if you call __conform__ directly, and somebody added code
> like this:
> 
>      raise LiskovViolation
> 
> So, it's not something you need to worry about a newbie seeing.  The *real*
> problem with the name is knowing that you need to use it in the first place!
> 
> IMO, it's simpler to handle this use case by letting __conform__ return
> None, since this allows people to follow the One Obvious Way to not conform
> to a particular protocol.

Not that my opinion counts for much =), but returning None does seem
much simpler to me.  I also haven't seen any arguments against this
route of handling protocol nonconformance...  Is there a particular
advantage to the exception-raising scheme?

Steve
-- 
You can wordify anything if you just verb it.
        --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy