RetroSearch Browse

Wed Aug 24 15:08:56 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-August/055615.html

Raymond Hettinger writes:
> The latest version of PEP 348 still proposes that a bare except clause
> will default to Exception instead of BaseException.  Initially, I had
> thought that might be a good idea but now think it is doomed and needs
> to be removed from the PEP.

Guido writes:
> If we syntactically enforce that the bare except, if present, must be
> last, would that remove your objection? I agree that a bare except in
> the middle is an anomaly, but that doesn't mean we can't keep bare
> except: as a shorthand for except Exception:.

Explicit is better than Implicit. I think that in newly written code
"except Exception:" is better (more explicit and easier to understand)
than "except:" Legacy code that uses "except:" can remain unchanged *IF*
the meaning of "except:" is unchanged... but I think we all agree that
this is unwise because the existing meaning is a tempting trap for the
unwary. So I don't see any advantage to keeping bare "except:" in the
long run. What we do to ease the transition is a different question,
but one more easily resolved.

-- Michael Chermside

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-August/055615.html below:

[Python-Dev] Bare except clauses in PEP 348