duplicity-talk
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Duplicity-talk] problem w/ pydrive


From: Kenneth Loafman
Subject: Re: [Duplicity-talk] problem w/ pydrive
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 10:06:49 -0600

You are correct.  Within __init__() a failure would cause the backend class to fail and produce a traceback.  Since the class is not initialized unless used, removing the try/except would cause no harm.  Then backend.py could catch the error in get_backend_object:208.  [Why is it looking for an ImportError there since the importing is done in import_backends:80.  Maybe some dead code?]


On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:27 AM, <address@hidden> wrote:
hey Ken,

i assume that <report ...> is pseudo code for printing the error w/ stack, or? why is that more elegant than rewrapping the error stack and have the calling code deal w/ the exception?

but why catch it at all, if an init error fails the backend anyway?

..ede

On 01.03.2017 16:16, Kenneth Loafman wrote:
> Correction:
>
> try:
>     import foo
>     import bar
> except ImportError as e:
>     <report import error and read manual>
>     <report exception from str(e)>
>     raise
> except Exception as e:
>     <report exception and str(e)>
>     raise
>
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Kenneth Loafman <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
>
>     ede,
>
>     More like the following:
>
>     try:
>         import foo
>         import bar
>     except ImportError:
>         <report import error and read manual>
>         raise
>     except Exception as e:
>         <report exception and str(e)>
>         raise
>
>     ...Ken
>
>
>     On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 6:25 PM, <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
>
>         Ken,
>
>         any hint on how? something like this
>           http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3847503/wrapping-exceptions-in-python <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3847503/wrapping-exceptions-in-python>
>         ?
>
>         easiest would be probably to simply get rid of the try catch, but then we would loose the "check the manpage" text.
>
>         ..ede
>
>         On 28.02.2017 20:52, Kenneth Loafman wrote:
>         > Edgar, I've see it done, so yes.
>         >
>         > Douglas, could you report this as a bug?
>         >
>         > ...Thanks,
>         > ...Ken
>         >
>         >
>         > On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 1:18 PM Douglas J Hunley <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>>
>         > wrote:
>         >
>         >>
>         >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 1:51 PM, <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
>         >>
>         >> would you agree that the error should be visible, instead of the vague
>         >> message?
>         >>
>         >>
>         >> Good lord yes! :)
>         >>
>         >>
>         >>
>         >> --
>         >> {
>         >>   "name": "douglas j hunley",
>         >>   "email": "address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>",
>         >>   "social": [
>         >>     {
>         >>         "blog": "https://hunleyd.github.io/",
>         >>         "twitter": "@hunleyd"
>         >>     }
>         >>    ]
>         >> }
>         >>
>         >
>
>
>


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]