Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 9/26/2013 3:17 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: On 26 September 2013 16:53, Georg Brandl wrote: Sure, that's doable, but it dumps the full repr of "obj" in the middle of the sentence. The thing that's not practical is the neat and tidy wording Georg proposed, because the thing passed as "obj" is actu

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 26 September 2013 16:53, Georg Brandl wrote: >> Sure, that's doable, but it dumps the full repr of "obj" in the middle >> of the sentence. The thing that's not practical is the neat and tidy >> wording Georg proposed, because the thing passed as "obj" is actually >> an arbitrary Python object t

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

Am 26.09.2013 08:22, schrieb Nick Coghlan: > On 26 September 2013 15:42, Armin Rigo wrote: >> Hi Nick, >> >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: I'm strongly in favour of Georg's one ("Exception in __del__ caught and not propagated"). >>> >>> Such a change is highly un

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 26 September 2013 15:42, Armin Rigo wrote: > Hi Nick, > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >>> I'm strongly in favour of Georg's one ("Exception in __del__ caught and not >>> propagated"). >> >> Such a change is highly unlikely to happen, as it would require >> changing ev

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

Hi Nick, On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> I'm strongly in favour of Georg's one ("Exception in __del__ caught and not >> propagated"). > > Such a change is highly unlikely to happen, as it would require > changing every location where we call PyErr_WriteUnraisable. Er, wh

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 26 September 2013 09:05, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 24Sep2013 09:33, Glenn Linderman wrote: > | [MRAB]: > | >> Why not just say something like "Cannot propagate exception..."; it's > | >> simpler than "Unpropagatable exception...". [...] > | > | First one I've heard that accurately and unambi

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 9/25/2013 5:17 PM, MRAB wrote: On 26/09/2013 00:05, Cameron Simpson wrote: [ I've replied to two messages here: Georg's and Glenn's (supporting MRAB's). - Cameron ] On 25Sep2013 08:22, Georg Brandl wrote: | Am 24.09.2013 00:11, schrieb Greg Ewing: | > How about something like "Uncaught

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 26/09/2013 00:05, Cameron Simpson wrote: [ I've replied to two messages here: Georg's and Glenn's (supporting MRAB's). - Cameron ] On 25Sep2013 08:22, Georg Brandl wrote: | Am 24.09.2013 00:11, schrieb Greg Ewing: | > How about something like "Uncaught exception in __del__ | > method igno

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

[ I've replied to two messages here: Georg's and Glenn's (supporting MRAB's). - Cameron ] On 25Sep2013 08:22, Georg Brandl wrote: | Am 24.09.2013 00:11, schrieb Greg Ewing: | > How about something like "Uncaught exception in __del__ | > method ignored"? It explains fairly clearly what has | > h

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

Am 24.09.2013 00:11, schrieb Greg Ewing: > Antoine Pitrou wrote: >> Yes, but I agree with Greg that "unraisable" is wrong. After all, it >> was raised, and it can even be caught by the programmer (inside >> __del__). > > How about something like "Uncaught exception in __del__ > method ignored"? It

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 9/24/2013 5:51 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > Why not just say something like "Cannot propagate exception..."; it's > simpler than "Unpropagatable exception...". That would definitely be an improvement on the status quo and avoids Antoine's concern about an adjective being interpreted as an inhe

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

24.09.2013 10:16, Antoine Pitrou wrote: On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 18:06:15 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: How is it wrong? At the point where the interpreter says "This exception is now unraisable", what, precisely, is it saying that is wrong? It isn't saying "this has never been raised". It is saying,

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 24 Sep 2013 20:06, "MRAB" wrote: > > On 24/09/2013 09:06, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >> On 24 September 2013 17:34, Antoine Pitrou wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:25:10 +1000 >>> Nick Coghlan wrote: You are setting the bar unreasonably high for an error message that has

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 24/09/2013 09:06, Nick Coghlan wrote: On 24 September 2013 17:34, Antoine Pitrou wrote: On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:25:10 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: You are setting the bar unreasonably high for an error message that has to convey a complex concept in as few words as possible. There is *NO* wor

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 18:06:15 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > > How is it wrong? At the point where the interpreter says "This > exception is now unraisable", what, precisely, is it saying that is > wrong? > It isn't saying "this has never been raised". It is saying, "where it > is currently being pro

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 24 September 2013 17:34, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:25:10 +1000 > Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >> You are setting the bar unreasonably high for an error message that >> has to convey a complex concept in as few words as possible. There is >> *NO* wording that can concisely expres

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:25:10 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > > You are setting the bar unreasonably high for an error message that > has to convey a complex concept in as few words as possible. There is > *NO* wording that can concisely express the concepts involved without > resorting to jargon, bec

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 24 September 2013 17:25, Nick Coghlan wrote: > Preferring the status quo because > you're holding out a forlorn hope for a concise wording that explains: > > - there are places where exceptions may occur but the interpreter > can't reraise them > - this is one of those cases, so we're printing

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 24 September 2013 10:50, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > MRAB writes: > > > > The word doesn't literally mean the exception itself was unraisable. It > > > means it was raised, we caught it and we're writing it to stderr because > > > we *can't raise it again*. > > > Ah, you mean "unreraisable

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 24 September 2013 08:29, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 14:38:48 -0700 > Ethan Furman wrote: >> > But that's because you already know what it's supposed to convey. The >> > average user doesn't, and only sees "unraisable". >> >> All the more reason to have text in the error messag

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

MRAB writes: > > The word doesn't literally mean the exception itself was unraisable. It > > means it was raised, we caught it and we're writing it to stderr because > > we *can't raise it again*. > Ah, you mean "unreraisable". :-) +1 Ugly as sin, but satisfies all other criteria (except fo

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 23/09/2013 22:19, Nick Coghlan wrote: On 24 Sep 2013 01:24, "Antoine Pitrou" mailto:solip...@pitrou.net>> wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:51:04 +1000 > Nick Coghlan mailto:ncogh...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On 23 September 2013 18:45, Antoine Pitrou mailto:solip...@pitrou.net>> wrote: > >

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 14:38:48 -0700 Ethan Furman wrote: > > But that's because you already know what it's supposed to convey. The > > average user doesn't, and only sees "unraisable". > > All the more reason to have text in the error message that is easily > searchable. Then I propose "CA6yuaYV6

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 09/23/2013 02:35 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 07:19:14 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: On 24 Sep 2013 01:24, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote: On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:51:04 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: On 23 September 2013 18:45, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Le Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:17:51 +1000,

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

Antoine Pitrou wrote: Yes, but I agree with Greg that "unraisable" is wrong. After all, it was raised, and it can even be caught by the programmer (inside __del__). How about something like "Uncaught exception in __del__ method ignored"? It explains fairly clearly what has happened, and also in

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 09/23/2013 02:19 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: The relevant C API function is just called "PyErr_WriteUnraisable", not "PyErr_WriteUnraisableButThatIsTechnicallyWrongSinceItWasAlreadyRaisedAndWeJustCaughtItAndAreNowReportingItToStdErr". Wow. How many legs does that HumptyCamel have, anyway? ;)

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 07:19:14 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 24 Sep 2013 01:24, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote: > > > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:51:04 +1000 > > Nick Coghlan wrote: > > > On 23 September 2013 18:45, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > > > Le Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:17:51 +1000, > > > > Nick Coghlan a é

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 24 Sep 2013 01:24, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:51:04 +1000 > Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On 23 September 2013 18:45, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > > Le Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:17:51 +1000, > > > Nick Coghlan a écrit : > > >> > > >> Here's what I suggest changing that error to: > >

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:22:45 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:51:04 +1000 > Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On 23 September 2013 18:45, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > > Le Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:17:51 +1000, > > > Nick Coghlan a écrit : > > >> > > >> Here's what I suggest changing that er

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 9/23/2013 12:23 PM, R. David Murray wrote: On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:22:45 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote: On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:51:04 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: On 23 September 2013 18:45, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Le Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:17:51 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit : Here's what I sugges

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:51:04 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 23 September 2013 18:45, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > Le Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:17:51 +1000, > > Nick Coghlan a écrit : > >> > >> Here's what I suggest changing that error to: > >> > >> >>> del x > >> Unraisable exception suppressed when call

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 23 September 2013 18:45, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:17:51 +1000, > Nick Coghlan a écrit : >> >> Here's what I suggest changing that error to: >> >> >>> del x >> Unraisable exception suppressed when calling > of <__main__.C object at 0x7f98b8b61538>> >> Traceback (most recen

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

Le Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:17:51 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit : > > Here's what I suggest changing that error to: > > >>> del x > Unraisable exception suppressed when calling of <__main__.C object at 0x7f98b8b61538>> > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "", line 3, in __del__ > RuntimeError

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 23 September 2013 16:11, Greg Ewing wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >> Somehow "unraisable" sounds too technical, > > > It's not even really accurate. It's been raised, it just > can't be propagated any further. But "unpropagatable > exception" would be a bit of a mouthful. I felt I needed

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

Guido van Rossum wrote: Somehow "unraisable" sounds too technical, It's not even really accurate. It's been raised, it just can't be propagated any further. But "unpropagatable exception" would be a bit of a mouthful. -- Greg ___ Python-Dev mailing

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 9/22/2013 9:29 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Sunday, September 22, 2013, Nick Coghlan wrote: Brevity is still a virtue. The relevant C API function is called "PyErr_WriteUnraisable", so just starting the message as something like "Unraisable exception suppressed in..." might work

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 09/22/2013 08:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: On 23 Sep 2013 06:38, "Terry Reedy" mailto:tjre...@udel.edu>> wrote: On 9/22/2013 2:41 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Terry Reedy mailto:tjre...@udel.edu> >> wrote:

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Sunday, September 22, 2013, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > Brevity is still a virtue. The relevant C API function is called > "PyErr_WriteUnraisable", so just starting the message as something like > "Unraisable exception suppressed in..." might work. > Somehow "unraisable" sounds too technical, and "

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 23 Sep 2013 06:38, "Terry Reedy" wrote: > > On 9/22/2013 2:41 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Terry Reedy > > wrote: >> >> On 9/21/2013 10:30 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >> Exceptions in __del__ point to bugs (sometimes

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 9/22/2013 2:41 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Terry Reedy mailto:tjre...@udel.edu>> wrote: On 9/21/2013 10:30 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: Exceptions in __del__ point to bugs (sometimes in the stdlib) that should be fixed, period. The only re

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 9/21/2013 10:30 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> Exceptions in __del__ point to bugs (sometimes in the stdlib) that >> should be fixed, period. The only reason they do not result in >> exceptions that are properly bubbled up and catchable

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 9/21/2013 10:30 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: Exceptions in __del__ point to bugs (sometimes in the stdlib) that should be fixed, period. The only reason they do not result in exceptions that are properly bubbled up and catchable is because __del__ is called from a DECREF macro which has no retu

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 10:48:33 +0200 Georg Brandl wrote: > On 09/22/2013 10:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 19:55:05 -0400 > > Terry Reedy wrote: > >> > >> > In the general case it represents a bug in > >> > the code that should be fixed. Most such errors arise from the vaga

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 09/22/2013 10:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 19:55:05 -0400 > Terry Reedy wrote: >> >> > In the general case it represents a bug in >> > the code that should be fixed. Most such errors arise from the vagaries >> > of module finalization (such as your issue 19021), >> >> L

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 19:55:05 -0400 Terry Reedy wrote: > > > In the general case it represents a bug in > > the code that should be fixed. Most such errors arise from the vagaries > > of module finalization (such as your issue 19021), > > Lets call that a buglet ;-). Not really harmful, but anno

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

Exceptions in __del__ point to bugs (sometimes in the stdlib) that should be fixed, period. The only reason they do not result in exceptions that are properly bubbled up and catchable is because __del__ is called from a DECREF macro which has no return value. Also, IMO writing to stderr is fair gam

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On 9/21/2013 6:15 PM, R. David Murray wrote: On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 17:16:41 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote: When an AttributeError is raised in a __del__ method, it is caught and ignored, except that it is not completely ignored but is replaced by a warning message sent to stderr. Example: >>> class

Re: [Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 17:16:41 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote: > When an AttributeError is raised in a __del__ method, it is caught and > ignored, except that it is not completely ignored but is replaced by a > warning message sent to stderr. Example: > >>> class C(): > def __del__(self): raise A

[Python-Dev] Revert #12085 fix for __del__ attribute error message

When an AttributeError is raised in a __del__ method, it is caught and ignored, except that it is not completely ignored but is replaced by a warning message sent to stderr. Example: >>> class C(): def __del__(self): raise AttributeError >>> c=C() >>> del c Exception AttributeEr