Message278539
On 12-Oct-2016, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> In this case, I think just reporting the first failing item is fine,
> and mentioning the type of that item in the error message is the
> most useful additional information we can provide to make things
> easier to debug.
Yes; also, the type expected, so the user knows what's different from
expected.
That is, the error message should say exactly what type is expected
*and* exactly what type failed that check. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2016-10-12 19:37:11 | bignose | set | recipients:
+ bignose, brett.cannon, rhettinger, ncoghlan, ezio.melotti, eric.snow, berker.peksag, serhiy.storchaka, Julian.Gindi, davidszotten@gmail.com, Tim.Graham |
2016-10-12 19:37:11 | bignose | link | issue21720 messages |
2016-10-12 19:37:11 | bignose | create | |
|