R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> added the comment: My impression is that IGNORE_EXCEPTION_DETAIL is designed to allow you to have a doctest as an example with a fully typed out exception detail, but have it pass even if the exception detail changes. If that is indeed the original design, then I think your case 4 should pass.]
The one argument against it that I can see is the hypothetical case of an x.y.Error passing when the code actually raised an a.b.Error when a rename is *not* involved. But that seems like a marginal enough case that we could just ignore it. Especially since having case 4 pass makes the behavior of the modified IGNORE_EXCEPTION_DETAIL more consistent. ---------- nosy: +r.david.murray _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue7490> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
