On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 1:24 PM Christopher Barker <python...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 1:38 AM M.-A. Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> wrote: > >> Adding more exception types to the stack makes sense when there's >> a dedicated need to catch only specific sub types, but even there >> it's already possible to add this extra information to the exception >> objects as e.g. .errno or similar attribute. >> > > Maybe it's too late for this, but I would love it if ".errno or similar" > were more standardized. As it is, every exception may have it's own way to > find out more about exactly what caused it, and often you are left with > parsing the message if you really want to know. > > Honestly, I've never written production code that does that -- but I don't > think that's because there's no need for it, but because, well, parsing an > error message is pretty painful, and just seems "wrong". > > I'm not sure how this could reasonably work, but maybe we could > standardize that all Exceptions have an .errno attribute, and a standard > mapping between the errorno and a message, or, .... > > +100 With the exception of the obscure "SyntaxError: Invalid syntax", this would make it really easy to provide translations of error messages in other languages (or in "beginner friendly English") as I'm slowly doing with friendly-traceback. André Roberge
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/MN6XX4H76UJZV3UJGHVW4LKTBCAQFXDY/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
