On 3/7/06, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frederick suggested a change to quit/exit a while ago, so it wasn't just
> a string with slight instructional purpose, but actually useful. The
> discussion was surprisingly involved, despite the change really trully
> not being that big. And everyone drifted off, too tired from the
> discussion to make a change. I suppose it didn't help that the original
> proposal struck some people as too magic, while there were some more
> substantive problems brought up as well, and when you mix aesthetic with
> technical concerns everyone gets all distracted and worked up. Anyway,
> I would like to re-propose one of the ideas that came up (originally
> from Ping?):
>
> class Quitter(object):
> def __init__(self, name):
> self.name = name
> def __repr__(self):
> return 'Use %s() to exit' % self.name
> def __call__(self):
> raise SystemExit()
> quit = Quitter('quit')
> exit = Quitter('exit')
>
> This is not very magical, but I think is more helpful than the current
> behavior. It does not satisfy the "just do what I said" argument for
> not requiring the call (quit() not quit), but eh -- I guess it seemed
> like everything that didn't require a call had some scary corner case
> where the interpreter would abruptly exit.
+1 from me. Only change I would make is pass an argument to
SystemExit() such as "%s() called", although the chances of this
exception being caught is very slim.
-Brett
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
