>>>>> Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> (CB) wrote:
>CB> On Jul 14, 4:48 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek- >central.gen.new_zealand> wrote: >>> In message <93f6a517-63d8-4c80- >>> >>> bf19-4614b7099...@m7g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Carl Banks wrote: >>> > Or would you rather let all unexpected exceptions print to standard >>> > error, which is often a black hole in non-interactive sitations? >>> >>> Since when? >>> >>> Cron, for example, collects standard error and mails it to you. >CB> 1. Cron is only one way to run programs non-interactively. (Would that >CB> work with, say, Windows services?) >CB> 2. Many systems don't run MTAs these days >CB> 3. In my experience the pipeline from cron to mail delivery is error >CB> prone, mainly due to the complexity of configuring MTAs >CB> 4. Even if all this works, you might just want to do your logging >CB> directly in Python anyway Even then, I think the program would get structured better if the FTP code would only catch FTP-specific errors, including socket errors (which is what all_errors does) and to catch programming errors etc on another level, e.g by the mentioned sys.excepthook. -- Piet van Oostrum <p...@cs.uu.nl> URL: http://pietvanoostrum.com [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] Private email: p...@vanoostrum.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
