On 1/23/07, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Phillip J. Eby wrote: > > The 2-expression "raise" statement translation is incorrect in the general > > case; it is possible for the second argument to be an instance of the first > > argument, in which case 'raise E, V' should become just 'raise V'. This is > > not detectable by the refactoring tool, AFAIK. > > There is another issue which currently isn't entirely clear in this PEP > or in PEP 352 - what happens to except statements which raise a subtype > of Exception instead of an instance of it. > > It's currently implicit that this will continue to be allowed (with > subtypes being automatically instantiated with no arguments) - I think > that behaviour should be explicitly stated as intentional in the new > Py3k PEP.
Does this language work for you? """ 2. ``raise E`` (with a single argument) is used to raise a new exception. This form has two sub-variants: ``E`` may be either an instance of ``BaseException`` [#pep352]_ or a subclass of ``BaseException``. If ``E`` is a subclass, it will be called with no arguments to obtain an exception instance. To raise anything else is an error. """ Thanks, Collin Winter _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
