Message216636
| Author |
vstinner |
| Recipients |
matrixise, pitrou, rhettinger, vstinner |
| Date |
2014年04月17日.01:37:48 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1397698669.32.0.971003260992.issue21259@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> FYI, the two are not equivalent.
I don't get your point, the purpose of the change is to get ride of "except: pass" which is *bad*.
> Even then, the new code would be slower than the original,
I don't understand why you are talking about performances here. Ignore SystemExit and KeyboardInterrupt is a huge bug, performances don't matter here.
I don't want to benchmark, but I expect that performances are exactly the same if no exception is raised.
Please don't close the issue, Stéphane is fixing real bug.
I agree that it would be better to split the large patch is shorter parts. Or all changes replacing "except: pass" should be grouped into the same patch.
Replacing "except: <code>; raise" with "except Exception: <code>; raise" is wrong. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2014年04月17日 01:37:49 | vstinner | set | recipients:
+ vstinner, rhettinger, pitrou, matrixise |
| 2014年04月17日 01:37:49 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1397698669.32.0.971003260992.issue21259@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2014年04月17日 01:37:49 | vstinner | link | issue21259 messages |
| 2014年04月17日 01:37:48 | vstinner | create |
|