Lie Ryan writes:
> There are lots of reason why bare-except is bad, one being is that it
> makes it way too easy to ignore errors that you don't actually want to
> silence; and given that bare-excepts would prevent Ctrl+C (Interrupt)
> from working. Sorry, but IMHO we shouldn't make syntax sugar
On 03/03/2010 08:27 PM, Oren Elrad wrote:
> Howdy all, longtime appreciative user, first time mailer-inner.
>
> I'm wondering if there is any support (tepid better than none) for the
> following syntactic sugar:
>
> silence:
> . block
>
> ->
>
> try:
> .b
