On 8/5/05, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also strong -1 on renaming RuntimeWarning to SemanticsWarning.
>
> Besides being another unnecessary change (trying to solve a non-existent
> problem), this isn't an improvement. The phrase RuntimeWarning is
> sufficiently generic to allow
On 8/5/05, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [ Guido]
> > One more thing. Is renaming NameError to NamespaceError really worth
> > it? I'd say that NameError is just as clear.
>
> +1 on NameError -- it's clear, easy to type, isn't a gratuitous change,
> and doesn't make you think twic
Also strong -1 on renaming RuntimeWarning to SemanticsWarning.
Besides being another unnecessary change (trying to solve a non-existent
problem), this isn't an improvement. The phrase RuntimeWarning is
sufficiently generic to allow it to be used for a number of purposes.
In costrast, SemanticsWar
[ Guido]
> One more thing. Is renaming NameError to NamespaceError really worth
> it? I'd say that NameError is just as clear.
+1 on NameError -- it's clear, easy to type, isn't a gratuitous change,
and doesn't make you think twice about NamespaceError vs NameSpaceError.
Raymond
___
One more thing. Is renaming NameError to NamespaceError really worth
it? I'd say that NameError is just as clear.
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/m
James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
> >
> > Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> > proposal would then be to make bare 'except:' call StandardError.
>
> I don't see how that can work. Any solution that is
On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Guido van Rossum]
> > > OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
> > >
> > > Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> > > proposal would then be to make bare 'except:' call StandardError.
>
> [James Y Kn
> The problem with Raisable
> is that it doesn't contain the word exception; perhaps we can call it
> BaseException?
+1
> A refinement might be to introduce something called Error, which would
> change the last part of the avove hierarchy as follows:
. . .
> This has a nice symmetry between E
[Guido van Rossum]
> > OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
> >
> > Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> > proposal would then be to make bare 'except:' call StandardError.
[James Y Knight]
> I don't see how that can work. Any solution that is expected
On 8/3/05, James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 3, 2005, at 3:00 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > [...brain hums...]
> >
> > OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
> >
> > Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> > proposal would then be to make b
On Aug 3, 2005, at 3:00 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> [...brain hums...]
>
> OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
>
> Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> proposal would then be to make bare 'except:' call StandardError.
I don't see how that can work. A
On 8/3/05, Russell E. Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > New Hierarchy
> > =
> >
> > Exception
[SNIP]
> > +-- StandardError
[SNIP]
> > +-- EnvironmentError
> > +-- OSError
> > +-- IOError
>
> > Because of EIBTI?
>
> Don't know the acronym (and neither does acronymfinder.com).
Sorry. Explicit is Better than Implicit.
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://m
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> New Hierarchy
> =
>
> Exception
> +-- CriticalException (new)
> +-- KeyboardInterrupt
> +-- MemoryError
> +-- SystemError
> +-- ControlFlowException (new)
> +-- StopIteration
> +-- Generator
On 8/3/05, Michael Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> > on the blackboard? :-).
> >
> > Start with Brett's latest proposal. Goal: keep bare "except:" but
> > change it to catc
Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> on the blackboard? :-).
>
> Start with Brett's latest proposal. Goal: keep bare "except:" but
> change it to catch only the part of the hierarchy rooted at
> StandardError.
>
> - C
On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/3/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> > > on the blackboard? :-).
> > >
> > > Start with Bret
On 8/3/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> > on the blackboard? :-).
> >
> > Start with Brett's latest proposal.
>
> Including renaming (I want to know if you
On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> on the blackboard? :-).
>
> Start with Brett's latest proposal.
Including renaming (I want to know if you support the renamings at
all, if I should make them more of an
On 8/3/05, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 11:10 PM 8/3/2005 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> > New exceptions:
> > - Raisable (new base)
> > - ControlFlow (inherits from Raisable)
> > - CriticalError (inherits from Raisable)
> > - GeneratorExit (inherits from
On 8/3/05, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > +1. The main things that need fixing, IMO, are the need for critical and
> > control flow exceptions to be distinguished from "normal" errors. The rest
> > is mostly too abstract for me to care about in 2.x.
>
> I gue
So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
on the blackboard? :-).
Start with Brett's latest proposal. Goal: keep bare "except:" but
change it to catch only the part of the hierarchy rooted at
StandardError.
- Call the root of the hierarchy Raisable.
- Rename CriticalExc
On 8/2/05, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Py3.0 PEPs are a bit disconcerting. Without 3.0 actively in
> development, it is difficult to get the participation, interest, and
> seriousness of thought that we apply to the current release. The PEPs
> may have the effect of prematu
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>
>>+1. The main things that need fixing, IMO, are the need for critical and
>>control flow exceptions to be distinguished from "normal" errors. The rest
>>is mostly too abstract for me to care about in 2.x.
>
>
> I guess, before we figure out "whe
At 11:10 PM 8/3/2005 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> New exceptions:
> - Raisable (new base)
> - ControlFlow (inherits from Raisable)
> - CriticalError (inherits from Raisable)
> - GeneratorExit (inherits from ControlFlow)
> Added inheritance:
> - Exception from R
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> +1. The main things that need fixing, IMO, are the need for critical and
> control flow exceptions to be distinguished from "normal" errors. The rest
> is mostly too abstract for me to care about in 2.x.
I guess, before we figure out "where would we like to go?", we rea
At 09:02 PM 8/2/2005 -0400, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>The Py3.0 PEPs are a bit disconcerting. Without 3.0 actively in
>development, it is difficult to get the participation, interest, and
>seriousness of thought that we apply to the current release. The PEPs
>may have the effect of prematurely fi
TECTED] [mailto:python-dev-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brett Cannon
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:34 PM
> To: Python Dev
> Subject: [Python-Dev] PEP, take 2: Exception Reorganization for Python
3.0
>
> OK, having taken in all of the suggestions, here is another revision
> rou
OK, having taken in all of the suggestions, here is another revision
round. I think I still have a place or two I partially ignored people
just because there was not a severe uproar and I still think the
original idea is good (renaming RuntimeError, for instance). I also
added notes on handling t
29 matches
Mail list logo
