Is it obvious whether pyrex extensions are in use?

[Alexander Belchenko]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

John Arbash Meinel пишет:
> James Westby wrote:
>> Hi,
> 
>> If a user submits a bug report it may be useful to know whether they are
>> using pyrex extensions or not. I guess this is obvious if a traceback
>> contains the extension, but is it obvious otherwise? Should it be made
>> more prominent?
> 
>> Thanks,
> 
>> James
> 
> 
> All of my current pyrex implementations use a different name for the
> function. So if there is an exception it will be "module_c.function_c"
> rather than "module.function". Which is one of the reasons to have them
> named something different rather than doing just "import
> module.function" which Alexander was working on.

Actually traceback show full names of files, not only module names and function names.
So your point is not valid.

> bzr -Derror init

bzr: ERROR: bzrlib.errors.AlreadyBranchError: Already a branch: ..

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "C:\work\Bazaar\mydev\bzr_man\bzrlib\commands.py", line 817, in run_bzr_catch_errors
    return run_bzr(argv)
  File "C:\work\Bazaar\mydev\bzr_man\bzrlib\commands.py", line 779, in run_bzr
    ret = run(*run_argv)
  File "C:\work\Bazaar\mydev\bzr_man\bzrlib\commands.py", line 477, in run_argv_aliases
    return self.run(**all_cmd_args)
  File "C:\work\Bazaar\mydev\bzr_man\bzrlib\builtins.py", line 1312, in run
    raise errors.AlreadyBranchError(location)
AlreadyBranchError: Already a branch: ..

bzr 0.19.0dev0 on python 2.5.1.final.0 (win32)
arguments: ['bzr', '-Derror', 'init']


But if pyrex module is not listed in traceback stack,
no matter how it named -- you have no idea is it used or not.

- --
[µ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGuUz5zYr338mxwCURAjpvAJ9qh0ky9cxAigpXO7d0i+yFISIxZACgg4zn
8Caj0oAGObcg2iVrdda2YKg=
=+Prq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----