"False exceptions?" (was Re: theme of the week: tools

[Steve Holden]

Dan Perl wrote:

> "Steve Holden" <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote in message 
> news:4157FD67.80404 at holdenweb.com...
> 
[...]
>>
>>As a recent convert to Wing I think you aren't giving them enough credit: 
>>remember, this only happens in the 2.0 BETA product (or, if it also 
>>happens in earlier versions, they are definitely planning to minimize the 
>>effects in the production version).
> 
> 
> According to the documentation this was happening in much earlier, 
> production, versions.  You are saying "they are definitely planning to 
> minimize the effects in the production version".  Can you please qualify 
> that?  Minimize how?  What does "minimizing the effects" mean anyway?
> 
All I was doing was pointing out htat they are aware of hte phenomenon, 
and that I (unlike you, apparently) am prepared to live with a minor nit 
in order to get the advantages the tool gives me.
> 
>>>I didn't try to figure out what their exception detection mechanism is 
>>>and why they have this problem.  I just uninstalled the IDE.  So 10 days 
>>>for the trial was more than enough after all. ;-)  I think I had it 
>>>installed for about 2 days.  I can tolerate a bug and I wouldn't be so 
>>>riled up, but what got me was the marketing spin and how they were just 
>>>excusing the bug, like they would never fix it.
>>>
>>
>>Well, I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that before they go into 
>>production they plan to add a standard list of such exceptions for the 
>>various Python versions, so that the standard libraries are far less 
>>troublesome in this respect.
> 
> 
> A "standard" list?  I don't see what's "standard" about that.  And the 
> "standard libraries" are not "troublesome", the IDE is.  On the other hand, 
> I suppose that this would be an "effect minimization".  I don't know what 
> their plans are, but they could include a list of all the possible false 
> positives and automatically ignore them.  Forgive me, but that is a hack and 
> I will not have any respect for that.
> 
Well, fine.

> You are using the same kind of marketing spin speak that Wingware is using. 
> I can understand that you like the tool and you feel you have to defend it. 
> But I think this is the wrong way to do it, both for you and for Wingware.
> 
Nope, I don;t feel I have to defend it. The tool does what it does, I 
was merely sayiong that some people (such as me) can work with it as it 
is. You apparently can't. Fine.

> I probably shouldn't get so worked up about it.  To be fair, since I tried 
> the tool I have discovered that Wing IDE also has the option to disable that 
> behavior and to debug in a mode where unhandled exceptions are just treated 
> like a normal run would treat them.
> 
Well, yes, but I thought we were focusing ont he deficiencies of the 
tool, not the advantages :-)
> 
>>Plus, IIRC, all you have to do is check an "ignore this exception" box to 
>>have a specific exception ignored everafter, which didn't seem like a huge 
>>deal to me.
> 
> 
> It's just too bad I don't have a checkbox for "Ignore marketing spin at this 
> location".
> 
Indeed. Hope you feel better now.

> Dan 
> 
> 
regards
  Steve