On 8/3/05, Russell E. Owen <rowen at cesmail.net> wrote: > In article <bbaeab1005080217346b2af653 at mail.gmail.com>, > Brett Cannon <bcannon at gmail.com> wrote: > > > New Hierarchy > > ============= > > > > Exception [SNIP] > > +-- StandardError [SNIP] > > +-- EnvironmentError > > +-- OSError > > +-- IOError > > +-- EOFError (new inheritance) [SNIP] > > I am wondering why OSError and IOError are not under StandardError? This > seems a serious misfeature to me (perhaps the posting was just > misformatted?). > Look again; they are with an inheritance for both of (OS|IO)Error <- EnvironmentError <- StandardError <- Exception. > Having one class for "normal" errors (not exceptions whose sole purpose > is to halt the program and not so critical that any continuation is > hopeless) sure would make it easier to write code that output a > traceback and tried to continue. I'd love it. > That is what StandardError is for. -Brett
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4