>>(Please reply to the tutor list, not to me privately) whoops
>>Generally, you want to catch the exception at the level that knows what to do >>about it. Your function2() isn't handling the exception in any meaningful >>sense, it is just converting it to a magic return value. You might as well >>just use magic return values everywhere if you do this. >>Even function1() seems like it is too low-level to handle the error since it >>is also just converting the error to a magic return. >>For short, simple scripts you can often omit exception handling completely. >>Any raised exceptions will propagate to the interpreter which will print a >>stack trace and exit. This is very handy - you get to see exactly where the >>error occured and the details of the exception type and message. This style >>may also be appropriate for handling any fatal error even in a complex script. >>For more complex scripts, for example a server or GUI app, or a script that >>processes many items, you probably don't want to exit the script on an error. >>In this case you might have a high-level exception handler that logs the >>exception and continues. For example here is a loop that processes a list of >>items, if there is an error processing an item a traceback is printed and the >>processing continues: I think you are correct that I haven't been letting my raised errors propagate high enough. That helps. Thanks very much. ds _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
