On 8/4/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This does contradict my earlier claim that Python itself doesn't use > RuntimeError; I think I'd be happier if it remained RuntimeError. (I > think there are a few more uses of it inside Python itself; I don't > think it's worth inventing new exceptions for all these.) >
I just realized that keeping RuntimeError still does not resolve the issue that the name kind of sucks for realizing intrinsically that it is for quick-and-dirty exceptions (or am I the only one who thinks this?). Should we toss in a subclass called SimpleError? -Brett _______________________________________________ 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
