Message239200
| Author | vstinner |
|---|---|
| Recipients | serhiy.storchaka, vstinner |
| Date | 2015-03-25.00:32:31 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1427243552.81.0.785917409462.issue23763@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
pyerr_match_clear-2.patch: Updated patch, more complete (I also removed the assertions, I only added to debug). > Since my patch makes assumption on which exception is expected, it can change the behaviour of functions if I forgot a different exception which is also supposed to be replaced. To reduce risks, we can just remove the new PyErr_ExceptionMatches() checks from the patch in a first time, and add them later, while being very careful. Calling PyErr_Clear() where exceptions must not be chained should be enough for a first step. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2015-03-25 00:32:33 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner, serhiy.storchaka |
| 2015-03-25 00:32:32 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1427243552.81.0.785917409462.issue23763@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2015-03-25 00:32:32 | vstinner | link | issue23763 messages |
| 2015-03-25 00:32:32 | vstinner | create | |