Message143214
| Author |
meador.inge |
| Recipients |
amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, brian.curtin, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, kumma, meador.inge, vinay.sajip |
| Date |
2011年08月30日.14:27:59 |
| SpamBayes Score |
6.1948147e-10 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1314714480.92.0.730814291982.issue9041@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
That is a good question. While it is true that errors other than 'PyExc_OverflowError', will be mapped onto a 'TypeError' I don't think that is a bad thing. Any errors that come out of 'PyFloat_AsDouble' should be handled on a case-by-case basis and not blindly passed back out the call chain. Otherwise, we may end up passing back errors (which are who knows what) that make sense for a caller of 'PyFloat_AsDouble', but not for callers of 'g_set'.
Also, the interface would become variable, meaning that whenever 'PyFloat_AsDouble' introduces new exceptions, then this code would too, which would lead to a somewhat unpredictable interface for callers of 'g_set'. |
|