Message269358
| Author | vstinner |
|---|---|
| Recipients | abarry, ezio.melotti, gvanrossum, martin.panter, r.david.murray, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner, ztane |
| Date | 2016-06-27.08:20:43 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1467015644.06.0.282541787553.issue27364@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Guido: "I am okay with making it a silent warning." The current patch raises a DeprecationWarning which is silent by default, but seen using python3 -Wd. What is the "long term" plan: always raise an *exception* in Python 3.7? Which exception? Another option is to always emit a SyntaxWarning, but don't raise an exception in long term. It is possible to get an exception using python3 -Werror. There is also FutureWarning: "Base class for warnings about constructs that will change semantically in the future" or RuntimeWarning "Base class for warnings about dubious runtime behavior". |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2016-06-27 08:20:44 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner, gvanrossum, ezio.melotti, r.david.murray, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka, ztane, abarry |
| 2016-06-27 08:20:44 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1467015644.06.0.282541787553.issue27364@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016-06-27 08:20:44 | vstinner | link | issue27364 messages |
| 2016-06-27 08:20:43 | vstinner | create | |