On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 12:05:01PM +0200, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 7/5/07, Gregory P. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:03:42AM +0200, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >> Why not simply inherit socket.error from EnvironmentError?
> >
> >True, that would be simpler; is it e
On 7/5/07, Gregory P. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:03:42AM +0200, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Why not simply inherit socket.error from EnvironmentError?
>
> True, that would be simpler; is it enough? If we avoid adding the new
> exception, I really think it should
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 11:03:42AM +0200, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Why not simply inherit socket.error from EnvironmentError?
True, that would be simpler; is it enough? If we avoid adding the new
exception, I really think it should inherit from IOError, not
EnviromnentError because sockets are I
On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 23:58:44 -0700, "Gregory P. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In response to bug 1706815 and seeing messy code to catch errors in
>network apps I've implemented most of the ideas in the bug and added a
>NetworkIOError exception (child of IOError). With this, socket.error
>would
Why not simply inherit socket.error from EnvironmentError?
On 7/4/07, Gregory P. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In response to bug 1706815 and seeing messy code to catch errors in
> network apps I've implemented most of the ideas in the bug and added a
> NetworkIOError exception (child of IOEr
In response to bug 1706815 and seeing messy code to catch errors in
network apps I've implemented most of the ideas in the bug and added a
NetworkIOError exception (child of IOError). With this, socket.error
would now inherit from NetworkIOError instead of being its own thing
(the old one didn't e
