[Python-ideas] Showing qualified names when a function call fails

[Nick Coghlan]

On 25 October 2016 at 23:20, Michel Desmoulin <desmoulinmichel at gmail.com> wrote:
> Should we make a PEP with all of those ?

No, incrementally improving error messages doesn't require PEP level
advocacy - it just requires folks doing the development and review
work of updating them without breaking anything, and adjusting the
test suite as needed. In a lot of cases what's feasible with an error
message (particularly from C code) depends a great deal on what
information is readily available at the point the error is being
reported, in others it's just that the particular error message hasn't
been updated yet to be a bit more user friendly, so it's hard to
establish new general principles around error reporting.

The question does make wonder if we should consider "Find and improve
an error message that annoys you because it omits frequently relevant
information" as our new default "I'm interested in contributing, but I
don't know what to work on" recommendation? While we don't want folks
changing error messages for the sake of changing them, or overwhelming
users with frequently irrelevant details, there's still a wide array
of error messages that could stand to provide a bit more context
regarding what went wrong, and it's the kind of change that can help
more folks start to see software errors as "I can solve this!" puzzles
rather than "It doesn't work and I don't know where to start in
figuring out why not" road blocks.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia