Mark Dickinson added the comment:
I was wondering how the TypeError got there in the first place. Diving into
the history is instructive: changeset cdfdd5359411 modified the exception
message:
taniyama:cpython mdickinson$ hg log -r19719
changeset: 19719:cdfdd5359411
branch: legacy-trunk
user: Tim Peters <tim.pet...@gmail.com>
date: Wed Sep 05 06:24:58 2001 +0000
summary: Make the error msgs in our pow() implementations consistent.
Before that change, the code looked like this:
if (x != Py_None) {
PyErr_SetString(PyExc_TypeError, "integer pow() arg "
"3 must not be specified when arg 2 is < 0");
return NULL;
}
>From that point of view the TypeError makes more sense: it's complaining about
>the wrong number of arguments rather than the negative value. The current
>message changes the perspective, and I agree that ValueError makes more sense.
Tim: any objections to changing the exception type from TypeError to ValueError
for Python 3.5?
I'd prefer not to change it for 2.7 or 3.4: there's an (admittedly probably
quite low) risk of code breakage, and little real gain to offset that breakage.
----------
nosy: +tim.peters
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue21193>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
