RetroSearch Browse

Mon May 2 05:42:35 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053195.html

[Phillip]
> By the way, I notice PEP 340 has two outstanding items with my name on
> them; let me see if I can help eliminate one real quick.
> 
> Tracebacks: it occurs to me that I may have unintentionally given the
> impression that I need to pass in an arbitrary traceback, when in fact I
> only need to pass in the current sys.exc_info().

I've updated the PEP (tying a couple of loose ends and making the
promised change to the new API); I've decided to change the signature
of __exit__() to be a triple matching the return value of
sys.exc_info(), IOW the same as the "signature" of the
raise-statement.

There are still a few loose ends left, including the alternative API
that you've proposed (which I'm not super keen on, to be sure, but
which is still open for consideration).

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053195.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 340 - possible new name for block-statement