Trim! for the sake of all that is holy, and most of what isn't. Soni L. writes:
> for starters: operator variants wherever exceptions are used as part of > API contract, and add a kwarg to functions that explicitly define > exceptions as part of their API contract. How do I decide when to (1) use None == builtin, I guess? vs. (2) the exception space defined by the new argument vs. (3) a exception space defined by my code vs. (4) a third party's exception space? At this point, the rule is "use whichever exception space helps Soni debug my code", which I don't consider an implementable specification. > if missing, defaults to None. all exceptions not raised in a specific > channel will not match a specific channel, but will match None. > > so e.g. you do: So, you've completely missed my point, which is that no, *I* *don't*. You need *other* people to add this keyword argument to *their* functions. I don't see a favorable benefit-cost ratio for me, or for anybody else for that matter. And if other people aren't using it, it's not going to help you with debugging masked bogus exceptions. Steve _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/SOW2ZOUVVAFZHNVUKZ7F4UL4DN2PFU6F/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
