Instance Exception Oddity: Implicit and Explicit not the same?

[Peter Otten]

RT Lange wrote:

> but if o is an instance of an E subclass (hence isinstance(o, E) is still
> true),
> shouldn't the first form raise an exception with type E (not E's subclass)
> and value o?

Again:

"If it is an instance of the class, the *instance* *becomes* the *exception*
*value*"

Or, directly from the source:

/* if the value was not an instance, or is not an instance
   whose class is (or is derived from) type, then use the
   value as an argument to instantiation of the type
   class.
*/

(comment in function PyErr_NormalizeException() in error.c)

As clear as you can get. I cannot comment on the rationale of that design
decision, though. I would replace the 

raise E, args # disallow in 3.0?

form completely with

raise E(args)

which would avoid the ambiguity altogether.


Peter

PS: I think you owe me an answer to Aahz' pending question now :-)