What a problem do you try to solve? What is wrong with the current documentation?

it seems odd to document digging around in sys.exc_info() in favour of the more ergonomic syntax to do the same thing

PEP 8 discourages the use of bare except.

It is a tutorial. The purpose of this part is documenting the bare except clause. It cannot be done without using a bare except in example.

There is nothing wrong with a bare except if it used properly (e.g. if the caught exception is reraised). In any case "except BaseException" is not any better, because it is equivalent to a bare except.

Note also that PR 21917 introduces an error: instead of printing the type of exception it prints the stringified exception itself (in some case it is an empty string).

The purpose of this tutorial section is to document how to catch all types of exceptions and extract the type and value. When this is required, `BaseException as err:` is the preferred approach.

This document still mentions the alternative approach so that readers will know what it means when they encounter it, and know to upgrade it to the py2.4+ syntax

Serhiy/Terry: Is further discussion needed? Can this be closed, or should the proposed PR be applied (after resolving any issues)?

New changeset e9a6f1b78bf57d9f3f99547bd007d7cfc9724cfb by Thomas Grainger in branch 'main':
bpo-41576: document BaseException in favor of bare except (GH-21917)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/e9a6f1b78bf57d9f3f99547bd007d7cfc9724cfb

New changeset 699ee016af5736ffc80f68359617611a22b72943 by Miss Islington (bot) in branch '3.10':
bpo-41576: document BaseException in favor of bare except (GH-21917)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/699ee016af5736ffc80f68359617611a22b72943

Thanks, Thomas! ✨ 🍰 ✨