Now we're talking. Although it might make more sense if (an abbreviated form of) its repr() were included in the error message -- that would help most humans diagnose the situation most easily.
--Guido On 5/8/06, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 20:51 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > Well, personally, I don't see the advantage. I don't see the point of > > having lots of different exception types that say "you made a > > programming error" in different ways, and I severely doubt the > > usefulness of being able to distinguish between those different > > failure modes at run time. Others do. I doubt that one side is able to > > convince the other side. So let's agree to disagree. > > What about including the object you tried to call as an attribute on the > TypeError? > > -Barry > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) > > iQCVAwUARGAVunEjvBPtnXfVAQKyxwP+P1n/GcDsZiW886e8rd1Z7NUni/cjh0ze > 11r+fD2hUFg/NvNdYM/VVR2tA2zfcQP96Rzsf40praHpQqc82aZkVxCXUa8iQqOX > TRCCKxhRYSkRU9AXiwmzho/Bx8D20HHXnMBfR4FSDFXQ+u8iSnYbCD895a7u9M1c > LXxFsy3YuFQ= > =e4x8 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
