➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author ionelmc
Recipients Claudiu.Popa, belopolsky, christian.heimes, eric.snow, ethan.furman, ionelmc, jedwards, llllllllll, r.david.murray, rhettinger, steven.daprano, terry.reedy
Date 2015-04-20.00:50:14
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <CANkHFr8SfSdAuejwZXM=cpqXmXs2DfCWHJfcaUUKxNDzi-mPAA@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <CALFfu7A0P9zBiOU_V5QXoQ2w7K6GUUVSkFpSLFR_X8PBbO3-ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content 
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Eric Snow <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:

> It not a problem currently for callable.  It is one you are proposing
> to introduce.  It is one which current users of callable don't have to
> worry about.
>
> >
> > Were do we draw the line here?
>
> We don't add to the problem.  Instead, we work to decrease it.
>

​What exactly are you proposing? Getting rid of AttributeError masking? I'm
talking about applying an old design decision (AttributeError masking)​ in
`callable`. Doesn't seem useful to talk about not having exception making
unless you have a plan to remove that from other places (that's even harder
than fixing `callable` IMO) just to fix this inconsistent handling in
Python.

Unless you think having inconsistent handling is OK. I do not think it's
OK. There should be the same rules for attribute access everywhere.
History
Date User Action Args
2015-04-20 00:50:15ionelmcsetrecipients: + ionelmc, rhettinger, terry.reedy, belopolsky, christian.heimes, steven.daprano, r.david.murray, Claudiu.Popa, ethan.furman, eric.snow, llllllllll, jedwards
2015-04-20 00:50:15ionelmclinkissue23990 messages
2015-04-20 00:50:14ionelmccreate