Visitar URL original
gh-95914: Add paragraph about PEP 654 in main body of 'What's New in 3.11' by iritkatriel · Pull Request #95937 · python/cpython · GitHub
Skip to content

gh-95914: Add paragraph about PEP 654 in main body of 'What's New in 3.11' #95937

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
iritkatriel merged 8 commits into from
Aug 13, 2022
Merged

gh-95914: Add paragraph about PEP 654 in main body of 'What's New in 3.11' #95937

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
232d87b
gh-95914: add paragraph about pep 654 in main body of 'what's new in …
iritkatriel Aug 12, 2022
6953eba
whitespace
iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022
87d77c4
heading
iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022
e18ee3c
whitespace
iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022
4b13c09
:keyword:
iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022
dd28613
revert PEP-678 changes. Update titles
iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022
c64a047
whitespace
iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022
602fdc9
whitespace
iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Next Next commit
gh-95914: add paragraph about pep 654 in main body of 'what's new in … 
…3.11'
  • Loading branch information
@iritkatriel
iritkatriel committed Aug 12, 2022
commit 232d87b07ac463672514c6efcca6235e47c28ced
23 changes: 21 additions & 2 deletions Doc/whatsnew/3.11.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -176,14 +176,33 @@ The :option:`-X` ``no_debug_ranges`` option and the environment variable
See :pep:`657` for more details. (Contributed by Pablo Galindo, Batuhan Taskaya
and Ammar Askar in :issue:`43950`.)

Exception Groups and ``except*`` (PEP 654)
Comment thread
iritkatriel marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated

@CAM-Gerlach CAM-Gerlach Aug 13, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could we be consistent about PEP numbers in Feature section titles? Right now the type hint PEP sections are in the form PEP NNN: <Title>, this section and the one below is in the form <Title> (PEP NNN), and the two above it don't mention the PEP number at all in the title.

IMO, it would seem to make sense to either elide the PEP numbers in the New Features section titles (as I do for the section below in #95914 , since they don't add much value for most users and are already mentioned/linked in the section body and Summary), or consistently use them with the same format between these two sections (I can take care of the others in my separate PRs, but it would be nice to be consistent here).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Comment thread
iritkatriel marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated

:pep:`654` introduces language features that enable a program
to raise and handle multiple unrelated exceptions simultaneously.
The builtin types :exc:`ExceptionGroup` and :exc:`BaseExceptionGroup`
make it possible to group exceptions and raise them together.
The new ``except*`` syntax generalizes ``except`` to match subgroups

@gvanrossum gvanrossum Aug 12, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In line with our policy that PEPs are historic documents, not documentation, maybe this should deep link to the part under https://docs.python.org/3.11/reference/compound_stmts.html#try where except* is described?

@ezio-melotti ezio-melotti Aug 12, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Both :keyword:`except* <except_star>` and :ref:`except* <except_star>` currently link to the beginning of the try section, where the except_star label is defined. For a deep link, the label should be moved down to the relevant paragraph.

@CAM-Gerlach CAM-Gerlach Aug 13, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, the keyword appears to be linked precisely, both judging from its position in the source on both 3.12 and 3.11, and the fact that the index entry correctly links to it. But maybe a :keyword: ref doesn't?

However, the :ref: is indeed not; it would be good to move the non-try ones (that presumably don't rely on the section name for default link text, since it doesn't even mention except/else/finally) down to the appropriate passages.

@iritkatriel iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think a link to the top of the section is fine.

Comment thread
iritkatriel marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
of exception groups.

See :pep:`654` for more details.

(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :issue:`45292`. PEP written by

@ezio-melotti ezio-melotti Aug 12, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :issue:`45292`. PEP written by
(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :gh:`89455`. PEP written by

@iritkatriel iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should be done (if at all) in a separate PR where the summary reference to the same issue is updated as well.

I say "if at all" because this is not historically accurate - I did the work under a bpo issue. Are you going to change all references to bpo issues in the docs to the gh issues they were mapped to?

Irit Katriel, Yury Selivanov and Guido van Rossum.)

Exceptions can be enriched with notes (PEP 678)
Comment thread
iritkatriel marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The :meth:`add_note` method was added to :exc:`BaseException`. It can be
used to enrich exceptions with context information which is not available
at the time when the exception is raised. The notes added appear in the
default traceback. See :pep:`678` for more details. (Contributed by
Irit Katriel in :issue:`45607`.)
default traceback.

See :pep:`678` for more details.

(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :issue:`45607`. PEP written by

@ezio-melotti ezio-melotti Aug 12, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :issue:`45607`. PEP written by
(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :gh:`89770`. PEP written by

Zac Hatfield-Dodds.)

@CAM-Gerlach CAM-Gerlach Aug 13, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could we make these changes in #95915 instead, since that PR is closer to the scope of the change (copyediting existing entries vs. adding a specific new one), and it will cause a significant merge conflict for whichever PR gets merged second otherwise?

@iritkatriel iritkatriel Aug 13, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok, I'll remove it and you can put it there.



.. _new-feat-related-type-hints-311:
Expand Down