Missing exceptions in PEP 3107

[Christoph Zwerschke]

Duncan Booth wrote:
> If you really want this then you can use a decorator to insert a 'raise' 
> key into the annotations:

Well, yes, but wasn't the whole point of PEP 3107 to get rid of such 
decorators and provide a single standard way of specifying this kind of 
info instead?

>> I don't know how determined the "->" syntax is already.
> 
> Consider the syntax set in concrete. The meaning of the annotations on the 
> other hand is completely up for grabs.

Yes, as far as I understand this is an experiment how people are using 
the annotations, and then later this may get standardized as well.

But maybe the PEP should then at least mention what's the currently 
recommended way to make annotations about thrown exceptions.

-- Christoph