Steven D'Aprano <steve+pyt...@pearwood.info> added the comment: Nick Coghlan wrote: > Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> added the comment: > > 1. Any syntax change requires a PEP (and, IMO, any such PEP for this issue > should get rejected: I don't consider this an important enough feature to > deserve dedicated syntax. Others disagree, which is one of the reasons why > a PEP is needed. The other, more important, reason is to ensure the new > syntax is spec'ed out clearly and incorporated into the language reference > for the benefit of other implementations in the event that it *does* get > approved)
This already has a PEP. This is an *explicitly* unresolved issue from the original PEP that introduced exception chaining in the first place. http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3134/ I quote: Open Issue: Suppressing Context As written, this PEP makes it impossible to suppress '__context__', since setting exc.__context__ to None in an 'except' or 'finally' clause will only result in it being set again when exc is raised. With Ethan's patch, no new syntax is required. Since you can already say: raise exception from another_exception the syntax remains unchanged. There is an API change: currently another_exception must inherit from BaseException, with the patch it may also be None, but that doesn't change the syntax. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue6210> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
