On 3/2/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, despite the existence of libraries that pre-create exceptions, how
> bad would it really be if we declared that use unsafe? It wouldn't be
> hard to add some kind of boobytrap that goes off when pre-created
> exceptions are raised multiple times. If this had always been the
> semantics I'm sure nobody would have complained and I doubt that it
> would have been a common pitfall either (since if it doesn't work,
> there's no bad code abusing it, and so there are no bad examples that
> newbies could unwittingly emulate).
Here's code from os._execvpe which reraises an exception
instance which was created earlier
saved_exc = None
saved_tb = None
for dir in PATH:
fullname = path.join(dir, file)
try:
func(fullname, *argrest)
except error, e:
tb = sys.exc_info()[2]
if (e.errno != ENOENT and e.errno != ENOTDIR
and saved_exc is None):
saved_exc = e
saved_tb = tb
if saved_exc:
raise error, saved_exc, saved_tb
raise error, e, tb
Would the boobytrap go off in this case? I think it would,
because a "saved_exc" is raised twice.
Andrew
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
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
