This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | Rhamphoryncus |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Rhamphoryncus, benjamin.peterson, pitrou |
| Date | 2008年06月06日.20:09:59 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.12676595 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1212783004.08.0.392490574358.issue3021@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
PEP 3134's implicit exception chaining (if accepted) would require your semantic, and your semantic is simpler anyway (even if the implementation is non-trivial), so consider my objections to be dropped. PEP 3134 also proposes implicit chaining during a finally block, which raises questions for this case: try: ... finally: print(sys.exc_info()) raise If sys.exc_info() were removed (with no direct replacement) we'd have that behaviour answered. raise could be answered by making it a syntax error, but keep in mind this may be nested in another except block: try: ... except: try: ... finally: raise I'd prefer a syntax error in this case as well, to avoid any ambiguity and to keep the implementation simple. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008年06月06日 20:10:10 | Rhamphoryncus | set | spambayes_score: 0.126766 -> 0.12676595 recipients: + Rhamphoryncus, pitrou, benjamin.peterson |
| 2008年06月06日 20:10:06 | Rhamphoryncus | set | spambayes_score: 0.126766 -> 0.126766 messageid: <1212783004.08.0.392490574358.issue3021@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008年06月06日 20:10:02 | Rhamphoryncus | link | issue3021 messages |
| 2008年06月06日 20:09:59 | Rhamphoryncus | create | |