GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. |
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites |
GeezerVison is showing mail.python.org — [Python-Dev] Warning Framework (PEP 230) [Python-Dev] Warning Framework (PEP 230)Thomas Wouters [email protected]Mon, 11 Dec 2000 17:58:39 +0100
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 11:02:29AM -0500, Barry A. Warsaw wrote: > - A function in the warn module is better than one in the sys module. > "from warnings import warn" is good enough to not warrant a > built-in. I get the sense that the PEP description is behind > Guido's currently implementation here. +1 on this. I have a response to Guido's first posted PEP on my laptop, but due to a weekend in Germany wasn't able to post it before he updated the PEP. I guess I can delete the arguments for this, now ;) but lets just say I think 'sys' is being a bit overused, and the case of a function in sys and its data in another module is just plain silly. > - When PyErr_Warn() returns 1, does that mean a warning has been > transmuted into an exception, or some other exception occurred > during the setting of the warning? (I think I know, but the PEP > could be clearer here). How about returning 1 for 'warning turned into exception' and -1 for 'normal exception' ? It would be slightly more similar to other functions if '-1' meant 'exception', and it would be easy to put in an if statement -- and still allow C code to ignore the produced error, if it wanted to. > - It would be nice if lineno can be a range specification. Other > matches are based on regexps -- think of this as a line number > regexp. +0 on this... I'm not sure if such fine-grained control is really necessary. I liked the hint at 'per function' granularity, but I realise it's tricky to do right, what with naming issues and all that. > - Regexp matching on messages should be case insensitive. How about being able to pass in compiled regexp objects as well as strings ? I haven't looked at the implementation at all, so I'm not sure how expensive it would be, but it might also be nice to have users (= programmers) pass in an object with its own 'match' method, so you can 'interactively' decide whether or not to raise an exception, popup a window, and what not. Sort of like letting 'action' be a callable, which I think is a good idea as well. -- Thomas Wouters <[email protected]> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
|
| You are visitor 01402520 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up. Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required. |