On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 6:25 PM Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 4:50 PM Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 3:26 PM Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >> Sure. This was in my list of reasons why the backwards compatibility
> >> tradeoffs are forcing us into awkward compromises. I only elaborated
> >> on it b/c in your last email you said you didn't understand why this
> >> was a problem :-). And except* is definitely useful. But I think there
> >> are options for 'except' that haven't been considered fully.
> >
> > Do you have any suggestions, or are you just telling us to think harder?
> > Because we've already thought as hard as we could and within all the
> > constraints (backwards compatibility and otherwise) we just couldn't think
> > of a better one.
>
> The main possibility that I don't think we've examined fully is to
> make 'except' blocks fire multiple times when there are multiple
> exceptions.
Vanilla except blocks? Not sure if I'm misunderstanding, but that
could cause some problems. Consider:
trn.begin()
try:
...
except BaseException:
trn.rollback()
raise
else:
trn.commit()
What happens if multiple exceptions get raised? Will the transaction
be rolled back more than once? What gets reraised?
If I'm completely misunderstanding you here, my apologies.
ChrisA
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/SGFE3XG4COLBC747U7IBVWRKWAULY43C/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
