Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Carl Banks <pavlovevidence@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 02:54:52 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 22, 7:22 pm, Steven D'Aprano <steve
+comp.lang.pyt...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There should be a mechanism for Python functions to distinguish between
unexpected exceptions (commonly known as "bugs"), which should be
reported as coming from wherever they come from, and documented, expected
exceptions, which should be reported as coming from the function
regardless of how deep the function call stack really is.
No, -100. The traceback isn't the place for this. I've never
disagreed with you more, and I've disagreed with you and awful lot.
Carl Banks
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Steven D'Aprano
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- References:
- How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: kj
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Ethan Furman
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Tim Arnold
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Ethan Furman
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Steven D'Aprano
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Robert Kern
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: kj
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Carl Banks
- Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- From: Steven D'Aprano
- How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- Prev by Date: Re: compiling Python 2.7.1 with readline module fails on Debian (Virtualbox)
- Next by Date: Re: Unable to decode file written by C++ wostringstream
- Previous by thread: Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- Next by thread: Re: How to pop the interpreter's stack?
- Index(es):