Antoine Pitrou <pit...@free.fr> added the comment: > Antoine, could "raise ... from" be used here?
That's a possible compromise indeed. It's up to Senthil to decide anyway. > Perhaps also using new subclasses of URLError to allow the exceptions > to be caught with finer granularity. That way no information would be > lost while at the same time not surprising clients who only catch > URLError based on the documentation. I agree there is a problem with the documentation announcing that all exceptions will be wrapped. Honestly I would like it better if that guarantee were dropped. In the meantime I'm not sure what the best course of action is. > At least one exception which I feel must be wrapped is socket.timeout. > Since we allow a timeout argument to urlopen, it doesn't make sense > for the fact of the timeout to be announced by an exception from > another library. You still may be interested to know that the request failed because of a timeout rather than (say) an authentication failure, no? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13736> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
