"Raymond Hettinger" <raymond.hettinger at verizon.net> writes: >> > Hmm, that may not be a killer. I wonder if it is possible to treat >> > BaseException as a constant (like we do with None) and teach the >> > compiler to interpret it as catching anything that gets raised so > that >> > "except BaseException" will work like a bare except clause does now. >> >> Sorry Raymond, but my first reaction is "ick" :). That seems to be a >> big change in the semantics of exception matching. I think I'd rather >> keep bare except than add that! > > That may be your only other option if we're waiting until 3.0 to > eliminate string exceptions and class exceptions not derived from the > hierarchy. I really hope string exceptions can be killed off before 3.0. They should be fully deprecated in 2.5. Cheers, mwh -- The Oxford Bottled Beer Database heartily disapproves of the excessive consumption of alcohol. No, really. -- http://www.bottledbeer.co.uk/beergames.html (now sadly gone to the big 404 in the sky)
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