> If you're trying to write tests, perhaps a better use-case would be > something like:
> with required_exception(SomeError): > do something that should cause SomeError Yes, you are right, that'd be a better and more flexible way, thank you. Sincerely, Dmitry Dvoinikov http://www.targeted.org/ --- Original message follows --- > On 6/20/05, Dmitry Dvoinikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Excuse me if I couldn't find that in the existing PEPs, but >> wouldn't that be useful to have a construct that explicitly >> tells that we know an exception of specific type could happen >> within a block, like: >> ignore TypeError: >> do stuff >> [else: >> do other stuff] > If I understand PEP 343 correctly, it allows for easy implementation > of part of your request. It doesn't implement the else: clause, but > you don't give a use case for it either. > class ignored_exceptions(object): > def __init__(self, *exceptions): > self.exceptions = exceptions > def __enter__(self): > return None > def __exit__(self, type, value, traceback): > try: > raise type, value, traceback > except self.exceptions: > pass > with ignored_exceptions(SomeError): > do stuff > I don't see the use, but it's possible. >> The reason for that being self-tests with lots and lots of >> little code snippets like this: > If you're trying to write tests, perhaps a better use-case would be > something like: > with required_exception(SomeError): > do something that should cause SomeError > paul _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
