On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:55:02AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Giampaolo Rodolà writes: > > >>> class A: > > ... def echo(self, x): > > ... return x > > ... > > >>> a = A() > > >>> a.echo() > > Traceback (most recent call last): > > File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> > > TypeError: echo() takes exactly 2 arguments (1 given) > > >>> > > > > I bet my last 2 cents this has already been raised in past but I want > > to give it a try and revamp the subject anyway. > > Is there a reason why the error shouldn't be adjusted to state that > > *1* argument is actually required instead of 2? > > As a function, it does take two arguments, and can be called > explicitly that way, no? Adjustment is not enough, the message needs > to be substantially rewritten. Something like > > TypeError: invoked as a method, echo() takes exactly 1 argument (0 given) > > captures the semantics, but is perhaps too verbose.
How about: TypeError: bound method echo() takes exactly 1 argument (0 given) That way you can also have: "unbound method echo() ...". And it's as semantically correct as the short "echo() takes ..." Not having looked at the code I don't know how hard it is for the code that raises this traceback to notice if it's a bound or unbound method tough. Regards Floris -- Debian GNU/Linux -- The Power of Freedom www.debian.org | www.gnu.org | www.kernel.org _______________________________________________ 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
