Message235483
| Author | ncoghlan |
|---|---|
| Recipients | adaptivelogic, eric.snow, gvanrossum, martius, ncoghlan, pitrou, rbcollins, rhettinger, vstinner, yselivanov |
| Date | 2015-02-06.13:31:41 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1423229501.23.0.469429869729.issue17911@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
dir() will get me TracebackException as a name, help(traceback.TracebackException) will get me its signature. IDEs with autocomplete and signature tooltips will do the same. There is nothing in those usage sequences to say "don't use __init__, use this redundant class method with the same signature instead". I agree providing a "directly from an exception" constructor is essential for cases where you're working with a caught exception at the Python level. I don't agree with the idea of duplicating the required low level API under a different name so it doesn't *look* like a lower level API in the documentation. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2015-02-06 13:31:41 | ncoghlan | set | recipients: + ncoghlan, gvanrossum, rhettinger, pitrou, vstinner, rbcollins, eric.snow, yselivanov, adaptivelogic, martius |
| 2015-02-06 13:31:41 | ncoghlan | set | messageid: <1423229501.23.0.469429869729.issue17911@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2015-02-06 13:31:41 | ncoghlan | link | issue17911 messages |
| 2015-02-06 13:31:41 | ncoghlan | create | |