FWIW, my viewpoint on this is softening over time and I no longer feel a need to push for a new context flag.
It is probably simplest for users if implicit coercions didn't come with control knobs. We already have Fraction+float-->float occurring without any exceptions or warnings, and nothing bad has happened as a result. Also, I'm reminded of Tim Peter's admonition to resist extending the decimal spec. I used to worry that any decimal/float interactions were most likely errors and shouldn't pass silently. Now, I've just stopped worrying and I feel better already ;-) Adding a FAQ entry is simpler than building-out Context object circuitry and documenting it in an understandable way. Raymond On Mar 24, 2010, at 12:36 PM, Stefan Krah wrote: > Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Raymond Hettinger wrote: >>> The decimal module is already drowning in complexity, >>> so it would be best to keep it simple: one boolean flag >>> that if set would warn about any implicit decimal/float >>> interaction. >> >> Agreed - those that want exceptions instead can use the usual warnings >> module mechanisms to trigger them. > > > I'm not sure about the warnings module. If lower complexity is a goal, > I would prefer Facundo's original proposal of just adding a single new > signal. Users who just want to know if a NonIntegerConversion has occurred > can check the flags, users who want an exception set the trap. > > With the warnings module, users have to know (and deal with) two exception > handling/suppressing mechanisms. > > > Stefan Krah _______________________________________________ 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