On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Benjamin Peterson
<report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>
> Benjamin Peterson <musiccomposition@gmail.com> added the comment:
>
> Oh, do we not consider __warningsregistry__ an implementation detail?
>

I guess you could view it that way. I just know I find it extremely
annoying for testing for the exact reasons JP mentions; it's
unexpected if you don't know about it.

If we made __warningsregistry__  about just recording what warnings
have been raised and not include filter information (which I what I
think you are suggesting) then it would still server its purpose,
albeit for probably a small performance penalty. Probably whomever
came up with it over-optimized and just didn't realize that it might
play havoc with testing.