> If you're trying to write tests, perhaps a better use-case would be
> something like:
> with required_exception(SomeError):
> do something that should cause SomeError
Yes, you are right, that'd be a better and more flexible way,
thank you.
Sincerely,
Dmitry Dvoinikov
http://www.targeted.or
On 6/20/05, Dmitry Dvoinikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Excuse me if I couldn't find that in the existing PEPs, but
> wouldn't that be useful to have a construct that explicitly
> tells that we know an exception of specific type could happen
> within a block, like:
> ignore TypeError:
> do s
Excuse me if I couldn't find that in the existing PEPs, but
wouldn't that be useful to have a construct that explicitly
tells that we know an exception of specific type could happen
within a block, like:
--
ignore TypeError:
do stuff
[else:
do other stuff]
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Keith Dart wrote:
> But then I wouldn't know if it overflowed 32 bits. In my usage, the
> integer will be translated to an unsigned (32 bit) integer in another
> system (SNMP). I want to know if it will fit, and I want to know early if
> there will be a problem, rather than la
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> [Keith Dart]
>> In SNMP, for example, a Counter32 is basically an unsigned int, defined
>> as "IMPLICIT INTEGER (0..4294967295)". One cannot efficiently translate
>> and use that type in native Python. Currently, I have defined an
>> "unsigned" type a
>>>lambda x,y: x+y*y
>>>lambda x,y: y**2+x
>>> are essentialy the same functions with different implementations [1].
>> Except that they are not. Think of __pow__, think of __add__ and __radd__.
> You know the difference between the concept of a function and it's
Michael Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not expecting anyone else to think hard about this on recent form,
> so I'll think about it for a bit and then fix it in the way that seems
> best after that. Feel free to surprise me.
And so that's what I did. I think I got this right, but threa
Gerrit Holl writes:
> What would happen if...
Raymond replies:
> Every molecule in your body would simultaneously implode at the speed of
> light.
So you're saying it triggers C-language "undefined behavior"?
-- Michael Chermside
___
Python-Dev mailin
[Keith Dart]
> In SNMP, for example, a Counter32 is basically an unsigned int, defined
> as "IMPLICIT INTEGER (0..4294967295)". One cannot efficiently translate
> and use that type in native Python. Currently, I have defined an
> "unsigned" type as a subclass of long, but I don't think that would b
[Nick Coghlan]
> And here we see why I'm such a fan of the term 'deferred expression'
> instead of 'anonymous function'.
>
> Python's lambda expressions *are* the former, but they are
> emphatically *not* the latter.
Let me emphatically disagree. Your POV is entirely syntactical, which
IMO is a s
10 matches
Mail list logo
