On 21-Mar-07, at 5:29 PM, Baishampayan Ghose wrote:
but then you would need to raise CreditRedirectionError somewhere
- too
much work for doubtful gains - not pythonish
Well, no matter what the programming language is, catching all
exceptions _is_ a bad idea. I don't think what you mean by being
``pythonish'', but if you mean ``pythonic'', I don't see how it is
related. See [1] for more. Catching all exceptions are only good if
you
re-raise them at some point of time [2]. I may be a n00b, but Ian
Bicking is certainly not one.
And `import this' for the Zen of Python.
i dont think you are right here. What Ian Bicking is talking about is
when you do something specific depending on the exception raised -
which would go wrong if the exception was not the expected one. In
this case, the except clause just executes a print statement - which
wont screw up the program no matter what the real error was. So
whether to catch all exceptions or not depends on the program. Your
CreditRedirectionError is a catch-all error anyway as it doesnt
specifiy why the redirection didnt work - so the end result is the
same whether you use it or not. On the other hand, if you wanted to
find out why the redirection failed and take appropriate action for
each of the possible scenarios, then you would have to raise various
errors like: RoshanDoesNotExistError, RoshanNotAtHomeError, etc etc.
In this case your point is valid. But the simple case covered here
does not require this granularity, hence providing pseudo-granularity
is un-pythonish (or un-pythonic).
Incidently, if *you* are a n00b - what does that make me?
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/
--
http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
