Guido:
> It seems that this is just for
>
> raise TypeError, "Test-Exception"
Actually, it's
raise TypeError("Test-Exception")
> But I think that you shouldn't be calling PyErr_SetNone() here -- I
> think you should call PyErr_SetObject(__pyx_1, __pyx_2).
>
> For details see do_raise() in ceval.c.
Hmmm. Having studied this routine *very* carefully,
I think I can see where things are going wrong.
Reading the C API docs led me to believe that the
equivalent of the Python statement
raise x
would be
PyErr_SetNone(x)
But it appears that is not the case, and what I
should actually be doing is
PyErr_SetObject(
((PyInstanceObject*)x)->in_class, x)
This is... um... not very intuitive. Perhaps the
C API docs could be amended to mention this?
Also, it looks as if exceptions have to be
old-style instances, not new-style ones. Is
that correct?
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+
University of Canterbury, | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a |
Christchurch, New Zealand | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc. |
greg@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz +--------------------------------------+
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