On Fri, Dec 20, 2002, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > if you have a valid argument for using return values instead of > exceptions (it's not like people will be installing thousands of > hooks, so it's not obvious what the problem is), is there any reason > not to allow people to use *any* callable object that can return a > value? (including three-line wrappers for pre-2.2 classes). Good point. That should go in the PEP. (In case it wasn't clear, I was arguing neither for nor against new-style classes, I just wanted it documented in the PEP since it was discussed.) Hmmmm.... I seem to also recall seeing discussion about the callable raising something other than ImportError when it just can't handle a path element. What happened to that idea? That would allow the hook handler to distinguish between "I had an error in handling this path" and "I can't handle this path". -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You discover truth everytime you use it." --reddy@lion.austin.ibm.com
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