R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> added the comment:
Yes, I think it is a good idea for site.py to issue error messages and continue
on when it is processing files that don't come from the python distribution
itself (such as pth files). However, I think just printing the error message
is not going to provide enough info. For example the error in this issue would
produce something like:
TypeError: embedded NUL character
Which wouldn't be much of a clue as to what went wrong. Likewise the case of a
pth file containing a like this:
import foo)bar
This would result in an error message like this:
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
This seems fine at first glance, but what if the pth file is:
import foo
and foo.py is:
foo)bar
We get the *same* error message, but the pth file itself is syntactically
correct.
So, I think it is better to print the traceback, even if it results in extra
info (lines from the addpackage routine itself). Attached is a patch that
takes this approach. I locate this code in addpackage itself so that I can get
the line number from the pth file for the error message, further localizing it.
And I wrap all of the code that I think could throw errors due to bad pth
files, but only that code.
Note that both of these patches also address issue 10642, so I'm going to make
this a superseder for that issue.
If you like this approach, Georg, then we just need unit tests :)
----------
stage: -> patch review
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file20159/site_pth_exceptions.diff
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue5258>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
