I guess I can agree (except for perhaps the "fortuitously" :-) ) Any word on whether test_functools and test_pickletools work for you?
Should I commit what I have so far? On Jun 29, 2010, at 5:46 AM, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote: > I would agree, except that we have been doing it like this for aeons and > changing this would probably break code. > There is code out there that silently checks for SystemExit and reraises > those exceptions, and fortuitously works for TaskletExit too. > On the flip side, there is code in pythonrun.c (IIRC) that checks for > SystemExit, but which we had to patch to ignore TaskletExits... > > We best leave this alone and worry about it later. > K > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:stackless- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeff Senn >> Sent: 25. júní 2010 12:43 >> To: The Stackless Python Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [Stackless] stackess for 2.7 >> >> >> On Jun 25, 2010, at 6:54 AM, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote: >> >>> Excellent. >>> I'll have a look when I'm able. >>> >>> Wrt TaskletExit, yes it makes perfect sense. Like SystemExit, it is >> an exception that you normally don't want to handle. So exception >> clauses like: >>> try: >>> do_stuff() >>> except Exception: >>> handle_error() >>> >>> will work as expected, and yet allow tasklets to be killed without >> fuss. >> >> Agree... though I was talking about BaseException (rather then >> Exception). >> i.e. do we want this: >> >> BaseException >> +-- SystemExit >> +-- TaskletExit >> +-- KeyboardInterrupt >> +-- GeneratorExit >> +-- Exception >> +-- StopIteration >> +-- StandardError >> | +-- BufferError >> ... >> >> Or >> >> BaseException >> +-- SystemExit >> +-- TaskletExit >> +-- KeyboardInterrupt >> +-- GeneratorExit >> +-- Exception >> +-- StopIteration >> +-- StandardError >> | +-- BufferError >> ... >> >> Unless there is some good reason for the latter, I think we want the >> former, no? >> I can't think of a good reason -- and it might be confusing to someone >> who is doing something >> where they catch SystemExit (probably in a 'finally'), expecting to see >> it only once... >> >> >>> >>> K >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:stackless- >>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeff Senn >>>> Sent: 24. júní 2010 16:13 >>>> To: The Stackless Python Mailing List >>>> Subject: Re: [Stackless] stackess for 2.7 >>>> >>>> Progress - it's now building, but I do see regular python test fails >>>> (compared to stock 2.7.rc2) on: >>>> >>>> test_email test_functools test_pep352 test_pickletools test_sax >>>> test_sys test_tk test_ttk_guionly >>>> >>>> I'm looking into them. In particular so far: >>>> >>>> test_pep352 fails because a text file in the test is missing a >>>> reference to TaskletExit. >>>> Easy to fix, though it also raises an issue about whether >> TaskletExit >>>> should really be derived >>>> from SystemExit or the BaseException class. >>>> >>>> test_functools is related the test_pickletools fail which might have >>>> something to do with >>>> the other pickling problem that Kristjan mentioned. K- Does >>>> test_pickletools succeed for you? >>>> The problem seems to have to do with some wrapping of a function by >>>> stackless... >>>> >>>> test_email and text_sax have to do with line endings (\n vs \r\n) -- >>>> which is odd and troublesome... >>>> and I'm looking more... >>>> >>>> test_sys has to do with the slot wrapper object size (for >> int.__add__) >>>> being 44 bytes instead of 40. >>>> (This might be correct for stackless -- it appears this test is >>>> commented out in release26_maint) >>>> >>>> and I haven't check the tk stuff yet at all... >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Stackless mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Stackless mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless > > > _______________________________________________ > Stackless mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless > _______________________________________________ Stackless mailing list [email protected] http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
