On 2016-03-22, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Jon Ribbens ><jon+use...@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote: >> On 2016-03-22, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> The first step in any program is to write it in the very simplest way >>> possible. That usually means ignoring all error handling. And yes, >>> this is true in EVERY language - C, PHP, Pike, DeScribe Macro >>> Language, you name it. >> >> I'm afraid I have to say I think this is absolutely terrible advice. >> If you write code in a language that does not have exceptions (e.g. C) >> and get it working with no error handling, the chances are >> approximately 100% that it will stay that way and be shipped without >> error handling, until that lack causes someone a major problem. > > There are languages in which it's inadvisable. But can you honestly > say that you've never written a C program with even a single error > check omitted, first time?
No, quite the opposite - having done it is how I know that what tends to happen is that the error handling never gets added ;-) > So yes, it does happen, a lot. The difference with languages like > Python is that this actually *is* good advice in Python. Indeed, this is why I think that exceptions are a vital part of a high-level language (and why Java's mandatory exception-declarations are an abomination). > Due to a mistake in editing, the parentheses around the "true in > EVERY language" sentence were lost, which would have made it clearer > that this is in two distinct parts: > > 1) This IS what happens, whatever language you use > 2) This is the right thing to do in Python, but not always elsewhere. > > My apologies for the confusion. Ah yes with the clarification I now agree with you ;-) -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
