Message241581
| Author |
ionelmc |
| Recipients |
Claudiu.Popa, belopolsky, christian.heimes, eric.snow, ethan.furman, ionelmc, jedwards, llllllllll, r.david.murray, rhettinger, steven.daprano, terry.reedy |
| Date |
2015年04月20日.00:50:14 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<CANkHFr8SfSdAuejwZXM=cpqXmXs2DfCWHJfcaUUKxNDzi-mPAA@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<CALFfu7A0P9zBiOU_V5QXoQ2w7K6GUUVSkFpSLFR_X8PBbO3-ZQ@mail.gmail.com> |
| Content |
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Eric Snow <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> It not a problem currently for callable. It is one you are proposing
> to introduce. It is one which current users of callable don't have to
> worry about.
>
> >
> > Were do we draw the line here?
>
> We don't add to the problem. Instead, we work to decrease it.
>
What exactly are you proposing? Getting rid of AttributeError masking? I'm
talking about applying an old design decision (AttributeError masking) in
`callable`. Doesn't seem useful to talk about not having exception making
unless you have a plan to remove that from other places (that's even harder
than fixing `callable` IMO) just to fix this inconsistent handling in
Python.
Unless you think having inconsistent handling is OK. I do not think it's
OK. There should be the same rules for attribute access everywhere. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2015年04月20日 00:50:15 | ionelmc | set | recipients:
+ ionelmc, rhettinger, terry.reedy, belopolsky, christian.heimes, steven.daprano, r.david.murray, Claudiu.Popa, ethan.furman, eric.snow, llllllllll, jedwards |
| 2015年04月20日 00:50:15 | ionelmc | link | issue23990 messages |
| 2015年04月20日 00:50:14 | ionelmc | create |
|