At 01:23 PM 6/10/2005 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote: >- throw() is a term taken from Java & C++. We can't call the method >raise() -- but perhaps we can call it next_raising() or next_raise(), >which emphasizes the similarity with next(). Thoughts? I'm not strong >on this; I think throw() is fine too, especially since I expect that >it will be used explicitly extremely rarely -- the only customer is >the with_template decorator.
I'm fine with throw, but if you really want to get 'raise' in there, how about 'raise_exc' or 'raise_exc_info'? >The issue is: if we allow VAR to be a >comma-separated list of variables now, that cuts off the extension to >(a) in the future; so the PEP would have to be amended to state that >VAR must be a single variable or a list of variables IN PARENTHESES. >Thoughts? Parentheses would make it clearer what's going on, so I'd be fine with that. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
