RetroSearch Browse

Tue Feb 28 22:57:52 CET 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/061908.html

Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I just realized that there's a bug in the with-statement as currently
> checked in. __exit__ is supposed to re-raise the exception if there
> was one; if it returns normally, the finally clause is NOT to re-raise
> it. The fix is relatively simple (I believe) but requires updating
> lots of unit tests. It'll be a while.

So does that mean with statements *will* be able to suppress exceptions now? 
(If I'm reading the PEP changes right it does, but I haven't finished my 
coffee yet. . .)

I'm not complaining if that's so, as I think allowing it makes the operation 
of the statement both more useful and more intuitive, but you were originally 
concerned about the potential for hidden flow control if the context manager 
could suppress exceptions, as well as the need to remember to write "raise" in 
the except clauses of context managers.

If you changed your mind along the way, that should probably be explained in 
the PEP somewhere :)

Cheers,
Nick

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
             http://www.boredomandlaziness.org

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/061908.html below:

[Python-Dev] with-statement heads-up