On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 20:08:28 +0200 Ram Rachum <r...@rachum.com> wrote:
> > If I understand correctly, you both agree that using "raise from" in > this context is better than using plain raise, just that the benefits > are not worth the price of a bulk update to Django. In other words, > "raise from" is the inevitable future, it's just that we're not in a > rush to get there. As Aymeric pointed out, that's inaccurate; If I understood correctly, Carlton's argument amounted to "it would be better to have the string produced by `raise from` in the output, but it's not worth the extra verbosity in exception handling code" -- besides the price of the bulk update. > Keep in mind that the thing I care about is not just usage of "raise > from" in Django, but in any Python package which is relevant. ... and Carlton's argument applies to them all; when also considering: > On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 17:18:41 +0200 > Ram Rachum <r...@rachum.com> wrote: > > > > > it's very rare to have a legitimate exception > > without a "raise from" inside an except clause. In almost any > > context in which "during handling of..." is correct, the raising is > > done deeper in the stack. > > I think the conclusion should be to ask for a change in Python, not Django. The rule "if an exception is raised explicitly from an except clause then it is considered raised-from" seems simple enough to me. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/20200207024841.368287f6.shai%40platonix.com.
