Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: > > The patch mostly looks good. However, all the w[-1] logic looks rather > verbose to me since its main use case in testing will be making sure > *one* warning happened. Returning a list adds the extra step of checking > the length and then indexing it for the warning validation. I'm not > completely suggesting that you bring back the smart list, but maybe an > option on catch_warning to just yield the WarningMessage on __enter__. >
Well, the real question is whether most users will use this for testing, or for temporarily suppressing warnings. The stdlib is not a normal use-case in this regard since we have to be so careful with giving deprecations. I honest don't fine the [-1] indexing that bad and I had to add all of them. =) Makes it explicit you are assuming there is at least one warnings (and probably only one) and you should check that there was not an extra one. I will wait to see if Barry has anything to say on the matter since he pushed for the change. _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3781> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
