On Saturday 30 July 2005 22:20, Brett Cannon wrote:
> True, but the hierarchy should still properly reflect increasing
> severity in my opinion. I am going to push for this; we will see if I
> get pushed back enough to not do it.
I have no idea what you mean by "properly reflect increasing sev
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> My view of Python 3.0 was that backwards-compatibility would not be a
> gimme in anyway. I personally am willing to break stuff in the name
> of clarity, which is the point of this whole endeavour. While I am
> willing to back off on some the proposed
Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 7/30/05, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > +-- Warning
> > > > +-- DeprecationWarning
> > > > +-- FutureWarning
> > > > +-- PendingDeprecationWarning
> > >
> > > Don
On 7/30/05, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > I like this a lot, and a good bit of it could actually be done in 2.5,
> > apart from the Exception/StandardError move, assuming also that the
> > renamed errors were also available under their old names. We could
> >
On 7/30/05, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
[SNIP]
> >> +-- RuntimeError
> > I still don't like the name.
>
> I'm not that fond of it either - but as the builtin exception most likely to
> be used (abused?) by user code, I expect changing its name would be more pa
On 7/30/05, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > Nick, are you going go start subbing in for Tim when he is busy and
> > take my work that I spent hours on, come up with an alternative that
> > took 10 minutes, and have everyone end up loving your newfangled idea
> > 10
On 7/30/05, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > +-- Warning
> > > +-- DeprecationWarning
> > > +-- FutureWarning
> > > +-- PendingDeprecationWarning
> >
> > Don't like the idea of having DeprecationWarning inherit from
> > P
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> I like this a lot, and a good bit of it could actually be done in 2.5,
> apart from the Exception/StandardError move, assuming also that the
> renamed errors were also available under their old names. We could
> probably go so far as to add Raisable to the hierarchy, but
Brett Cannon wrote:
> Nick, are you going go start subbing in for Tim when he is busy and
> take my work that I spent hours on, come up with an alternative that
> took 10 minutes, and have everyone end up loving your newfangled idea
> 10x more than my original? =)
It's like editing creative writi
On 7/30/05, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> > The reason for my -1 on the renaming and reordering is
> > that it would completely break compatibility of Python 2.x
> > applications with Python 3. Furthermore, there would be next to
> > no chance of writing new appli
On 7/30/05, James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jul 29, 2005, at 11:07 PM, Robert Brewer wrote:
>
> > I'd recommend not subclassing SystemExit--there are too many programs
> > out there which expect the argument (e.g. sys.exit(3)) to mean
> > something
> > specific, but that expectation
On 7/30/05, M.-A. Lemburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > Well, it has been discussed at multiple times in the past and I have
> > promised to write this PEP several times, so I finally found enough
> > time to write a PEP on reorganizing exceptions for Python 3.0 .
> >
> > Key
At 11:43 PM 7/30/2005 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>Here's a fairly minimal proposal, which is closer to the existing 2.4
>structure:
>
>New Hierarchy
>=
>
>Raisable (formerly Exception)
>+-- CriticalException (new)
> +-- KeyboardInterrupt
> +-- MemoryError
> +-- SystemErr
On 7/30/05, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > +-- ControlFlowException (new)
>
> While I like the idea of ControlFlowException as the "one obvious way" to
> break out of multiple nested loops, I'm not convinced StopIteration and
> GeneratorExit should be inherit
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Here's a fairly minimal proposal, which is closer to the existing 2.4
> structure:
>
> New Hierarchy
> ...
I also like this version.
--
Brian Beck
Adventurer of the First Order
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> I think the problems with this can be minimised by avoiding making
> changes we don't need to. I think only a few changes are needed to get
> a significantly cleaner structure.
>
> Here's a fairly minimal proposal, which is closer to the existing 2.4
>
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 06:41:51PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > Don't forget this is Python 3.0; if it makes more sense we can break code.
>
> Or if he can be persuaded that ControlFlowException should exist as a peer of
> Exception and CriticalException. . .
>
> >>>+
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> The reason for my -1 on the renaming and reordering is
> that it would completely break compatibility of Python 2.x
> applications with Python 3. Furthermore, there would be next to
> no chance of writing new applications that run in Python 3
> and 2, so you have breakage in
On Jul 29, 2005, at 11:07 PM, Robert Brewer wrote:
> I'd recommend not subclassing SystemExit--there are too many programs
> out there which expect the argument (e.g. sys.exit(3)) to mean
> something
> specific, but that expectation doesn't apply at all to SystemError.
Yes please make note of t
PyPy Sprint in Heidelberg 22nd - 29th August 2005
==
The next PyPy sprint will take place at the Heidelberg University
in Germany from 22nd August to 29th August (both days included).
Its main focus is translation of the whole PyPy interpreter
to a l
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> The PSF does have a reasonable budget, so why not use it to
> maintain the infrastructure needed for Python development and
> let a company do the administration of the needed servers and
> the importing of the CSV and tracker items into their
> systems ?
In principle,
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 16:59, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>
>
>>Perhaps. Somebody would need to research the precise migration
>>procedure. I once tried to move the Python CVS to Sunsite
>>(or its successors), and gave up after half a year of getting
>>nowhere; I'm personally no
Brett Cannon wrote:
> Well, it has been discussed at multiple times in the past and I have
> promised to write this PEP several times, so I finally found enough
> time to write a PEP on reorganizing exceptions for Python 3.0 .
>
> Key points in this PEP is the reworking the hierarchy, requiring
>
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 7/29/05, Robert Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>>>New Hierarchy
>>>=
>>>
>>>Raisable (new; rename BaseException?)
>>>+-- CriticalException (new)
>>>+-- KeyboardInterrupt
>>>+-- MemoryError
>>>+-- SystemExit
>>>+-- S
Brett Cannon wrote:
> +-- ControlFlowException (new)
While I like the idea of ControlFlowException as the "one obvious way" to
break out of multiple nested loops, I'm not convinced StopIteration and
GeneratorExit should be inheriting from it.
However, I'm even less sure StopIteration and Ge
OK, I withdraw the suggestion of the subclassing of SystemError by SystemExit.
-Brett
On 7/29/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/29/05, Robert Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > +-- SystemExit
> > > +-- SystemError (subclass SystemExit?)
> >
> > I'd recommend not
On 7/29/05, Robert Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > New Hierarchy
> > =
> >
> > Raisable (new; rename BaseException?)
> > +-- CriticalException (new)
> > +-- KeyboardInterrupt
> > +-- MemoryError
> > +-- SystemExit
> > +-- SystemError (subclass
On 7/29/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/29/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, it has been discussed at multiple times in the past and I have
> > promised to write this PEP several times, so I finally found enough
> > time to write a PEP on reorganizing exce
28 matches
Mail list logo
