RetroSearch Browse

Fri Apr 14 09:46:31 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-April/063732.html

On 4/14/06, Anthony Baxter <anthony at interlink.com.au> wrote:
> On Friday 14 April 2006 02:31, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > Tim Peters wrote:
> > >> I'm not the one to decide, but at some time the traceback module
> > >> should be rewritten to match the interpreter behavior.
> > >
> > > No argument from me about that.
> >
> > I also think the traceback module should be corrected, and the test
> > cases updated, despite the objections that it may break other
> > people's doctest test cases.

Let me chime in with agreement (2.5 only of course).

> I don't mind one way or the other, but with the number of people
> working actively on the code at the moment, I think reverting broken
> patches that don't have trivial test fixes is the way to go. The
> buildbot system is useless, otherwise.

That was the right thing to do (short of fixing all the missing tests,
which requires actual thinking :-).

--
--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/2006-April/063732.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] r45321 - in python/trunk: Lib/test/test_traceback.py Lib/traceback.py Misc/NEWS