Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Actually, if you go back to 2.4, before BaseException even existed, a
try/except with a new-style class in the 'except' clause was also
possible. Actual enforcement of what can be in an 'except' clause is a
new thing added by PEP 352. Suddenly m
Alexander Belopolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
I thought some more about this issue and the current behavior seems
wrong and potentially dangerous. Consider the following code:
class x:
pass
class y(x):
pass
try:
raise y
except y:
print "a"
except:
pri
Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
>
> See PEP 352. Currently this is slated for python 2.8. Perhaps the
> schedule should be sped up a bit in lig
Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
See PEP 352. Currently this is slated for python 2.8. Perhaps the
schedule should be sped up a bit in light the current release schedule.
Brett, any comments? We should add all the warnings from PEP 352 with
the -3 flag to 2.6.
--
n
Alexander Belopolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Py3k behavior seems to be better:
Python 3.0a2+ (py3k:61137M, Feb 29 2008, 15:17:29)
[GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5367)] on darwin
>>> try:
... raise ValueError("foo")
... except object:
... pass
...
Traceback (most
New submission from Igor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I have discovered the following behaviour in 2.5, which I cannot explain:
>>> try:
... raise ValueError("foo")
... except object:
... print "aiee!"
...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 2, in
ValueError: foo
>>> sys.version
'2.
