[Sugar-devel] SL Bug #2063
mukul at seeta.in
Mon Oct 11 15:16:14 EDT 2010
I had a discussion with Aleksey this morning at IRC on the feedback
recommended yesterday. Thank you Daniel and Tomeu. Appreciate your ideas and
We brainstormed on how the implementation of this functionality could be
done, and found that whenever any uncaught exception is raised, the
interpreter calls the sys.excepthook(type,value,traceback).
Wish to have the feedback on whether excepthook implementation would be
helpful to our use-case both short-term and long-term. Also, it would be
wonderful if feedback could be shared on its implementation in the context
of Sugar, or otherwise.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Manusheel Gupta <manu at seeta.in> wrote:
> Tomeu and Daniel,
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 09:57, Daniel Drake <dsd at laptop.org> wrote:
>> > On 10 October 2010 20:14, Mukul Gupta <mukul at seeta.in> wrote:
>> >> With reference to SL Bug # 2063 which deals with bringing some kind of
>> >> notification alert whenever an unhandled python exception occurs, I had
>> >> few doubts. There are two approaches that I can think of.
>> > Neither of these sounds sensible.
>> > What's wrong with the obvious solution of popping up a dialog when the
>> > exception occurs?
>> > Technically the exceptions are not unhandled, if they were unhandled
>> > then sugar would crash. I guess we're referring to exceptions that are
>> > not handled gracefully and instead fall back to a catch-all handler
>> > which does not have the knowledge to act on them.
>> This is what abrt does with python (and other) processes, maybe we
>> could reuse it or at least steal some of the ideas:
> Thank you for the feedback and pointers. Appreciate it.
> We'll discuss the approach shared by you this afternoon.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Sugar-devel