Author gregory.p.smith
Recipients christian.heimes, dstufft, gregory.p.smith, jafo, pitrou, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner
Date 2017-10-25.22:46:49
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <CAGE7PNJRL3phFRPsYQw_7RAxHXeuY-GAXVjYhQAmOjL7QXtZQA@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1508949407.86.0.213398074469.issue31702@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
I'd stick with ValueError in that case as well.  if someone dislikes the
valueerrors because they _want_ to use an invalid one, they can file a bug
and we'll reconsider only if they have a meaningful use case.

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 9:36 AM Serhiy Storchaka <report@bugs.python.org>
wrote:

>
> Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka+cpython@gmail.com> added the comment:
>
> What to do with values outside of the valid range (2**4 to 2**31 for
> Blowfish, 1000 to 999999999 for SHA*). Raise ValueError, OverflowError, or
> bound it, or just generate an invalid salt and allow crypt() to handle it?
>
> ----------
> nosy: +haypo, pitrou
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <https://bugs.python.org/issue31702>
> _______________________________________
>
History
Date User Action Args
2017-10-25 22:46:49gregory.p.smithsetrecipients: + gregory.p.smith, jafo, pitrou, vstinner, christian.heimes, serhiy.storchaka, dstufft
2017-10-25 22:46:49gregory.p.smithlinkissue31702 messages
2017-10-25 22:46:49gregory.p.smithcreate