On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:14:40 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Common Lisp has two ways of raising: functions "error" and "signal". > Python's "raise" is like CL's "error": you end up in the debugger if the > exception is not handled. Exceptions that are raised by CL's "signal" > don't have to be caught: if there is no matching "except" clause the > raise statement becomes a "pass". > > Or as Wikipedia states nicely: "Conditions are a generalization of > exceptions. When a condition arises, an appropriate condition handler is > searched for and selected, in stack order, to handle the condition. > Conditions which do not represent errors may safely go unhandled > entirely; their only purpose may be to propagate hints or warnings > toward the user." > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_handling#Condition_systems
If I had come across "signals" before now, I would have thought that they were a good idea. But after watching Lie repeatedly argue for tightly coupling functions together using signal-like "SoftExceptions", all I can see are the disadvantages. I'm afraid that if Lie's arguments are the best available for such a signaling mechanism, then it's probably a good thing Python doesn't have it. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
