Adam Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 8:07 AM, Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You mean they should be detected when the exception is set? I was afraid > that it may make exception raising slower. Reporting is not performance > sensitive in comparison to exception raising. > > (the "problem mentioned here" is already avoided in the patch, but the > detection of other cycles is deferred to exception reporting for the > reason given above)
I meant only that trivial cycles should be detected. However, I hadn't read your patch, so I didn't realize you already knew of a way to create a non-trivial cycle. This has placed a niggling doubt in my mind about chaining the exceptions, rather than the tracebacks. Hrm. >> * PyErr_Display is used by PyErr_Print, and it must end up with no >> active exception. Additionally, third party code may depend on this >> semantic. Maybe PyErr_DisplayEx? > > I was not proposing to change the exception swallowing semantics, just > to add a return value indicating if any errors had occurred while > displaying the exception. Ahh, harmless then, but to what benefit? Wouldn't the traceback module be better suited to any possible error reporting? _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3112> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
