On 2/28/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I just realized that there's a bug in the with-statement as currently > > checked in. __exit__ is supposed to re-raise the exception if there > > was one; if it returns normally, the finally clause is NOT to re-raise > > it. The fix is relatively simple (I believe) but requires updating > > lots of unit tests. It'll be a while. > > So does that mean with statements *will* be able to suppress exceptions now? > (If I'm reading the PEP changes right it does, but I haven't finished my > coffee yet. . .)
Yes. And unless there are peasants at the gate with pitchforks etc. it will stay that way. :-) > I'm not complaining if that's so, as I think allowing it makes the operation > of the statement both more useful and more intuitive, but you were originally > concerned about the potential for hidden flow control if the context manager > could suppress exceptions, as well as the need to remember to write "raise" in > the except clauses of context managers. Yes, I've changed my mind about that. > If you changed your mind along the way, that should probably be explained in > the PEP somewhere :) I don't know that PEPs benefit from too much "on the one hand, on the other hand, on the third hand" or "and then I changed my mind, and then I changed it back, and then I changed it again". -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
