[Python-Dev] Traceback style (original) (raw)

Guido van Rossum guido@python.org
Tue, 02 May 2000 13:22:02 -0400

On 02 May 2000, Ka-Ping Yee said: > I propose the following stylistic changes to traceback > printing: > > 1. If there is no function name for a given level > in the traceback, just omit the ", in ?" at the > end of the line.

Greg Ward expresses my sentiments:

+0 on this: it doesn't really add anything, but it does neaten things up.

> 2. If a given level of the traceback is in a method, > instead of just printing the method name, print > the class and the method name. +1 here too: this definitely adds utility. > 3. Instead of beginning each line with: > > File "foo.py", line 5 > > print the line first and drop the quotes: > > Line 5 of foo.py -0: adds nothing, cleans nothing up, and just generally breaks things for no good reason. > In the common interactive case that the file > is a typed-in string, the current printout is > > File "", line 1 > > and the following is easier to read in my opinion: > > Line 1 of OK, that's a good reason. Maybe you could special-case the "" case? How about , line 1 ?

I'd special-case any filename that starts with < and ends with > -- those are all made-up names like or . You can display them however you like, perhaps

In "", line 3

For regular files I'd leave the formatting alone -- there are tools out there that parse these. (E.g. Emacs' Python mode jumps to the line with the error if you run a file and it begets an exception.)

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)