| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ | ||
| Fix bug where an :exc:`ExceptionGroup` subclass can wrap a | ||
| :exc:`BaseException`. |
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityAs written, consistency suggests that class MyEG(BaseExceptionGroup, ValueError): should be unable to wrap anything but ValueErrors!
That may in fact be the intention, and it wouldn't break the trio.MultiError-as-BaseExceptionGroup deprecation pathway, but it's not the implementation and the tests don't distinguish these cases.
Otherwise, I think we'd want to document the behavior which is that "any subclass of ExceptionGroup can only wrap instances of Exception, like ExceptionGroup itself.", and therefore class MyEG(BaseExceptionGroup, ValueError): would be able to contain BaseExceptions 🤔
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityDoes it? In the doc the Exception becomes a hyperlink.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityBut feel free to make a PR with better wording.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityI expect some users to read that as "if a subclass of BaseExceptionGroup is also a subclass of X, it can only wrap instances of X"; I'll open a PR to rephrase as "if it's also a subclass of Exception, it can't wrap BaseExceptions".
But then we're still treating Exception as particularly special for subclasses, which feels a bit strange.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityZac, I'm confused why you think the sentence as written could be interpreted that way. It says Exception twice. In this context that is very clearly a reference to the specific built-in class named Exception (it even links there), not a "free variable" that must refer to the same class in both places.
Regardless, even if we clear that up, it feels like it would be expensive to inspect the class hierarchy to find other subclasses of BaseException and try to constrain the arguments to inherit from those. And that's definitely not what the PEP intended. We want the common case (where you're using one of the two built-in EG classes) to be foolproof, and other cases possible.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityApologies for the confusion, that's on me 😞
I do think the behavior in this PR is good, and I'll open a PR with some additional tests and maybe docs to distinguish it from the case that I was wondering about. Thanks again to both of you for everything.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.