RetroSearch Browse

Wed Jul 16 00:38:58 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-July/081180.html

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I wonder if it might not be simpler (at least in some cases) to just
>>> disable the warnings for certain modules? I imagine in many cases
>>> fixing up the 2.6 code to suppress -3 warnings would be mere busywork
>>> -- e.g. for code that gets deleted in 3.0 altogether. (Hm, in fact for
>>> such code there's no need to suppress the -3 warnings, as they serve
>>> as a warning to any user of the module that they are using something
>>> that won't survive into 3.0.)
>>
>> Very true. It might be easiest to just throw (maybe even just temporarily)
>>
>> if sys.py3kwarning:
>>    warnings.filterwarnings("ignore", category=DeprecationWarning,
>> module=__name__)
>>
>> at the top of the offending module.
>
> Is it possible to *first* 'raise' a DeprecationWarning("This module will
> disappear") before turning the rest off?  Exactly 1 seems the right number
> to me for modules that will go.
>

Wouldn't you just add the filter after the DeprecationWarning is
raised to have that behavior?

-Brett

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-July/081180.html below:

[Python-Dev] Running Py2.6 with the -3 option