Re: [pclasses-devel] Re: IO

[Christian P. <cp...@se...>]

Am Freitag 31 Dezember 2004 17:58 schrieb stephan beal:
> On Friday 31 December 2004 17:57, stephan beal wrote:
> > i can understand the throwing of an IOError, but LogicError seems a
> > bit too strict.
> >
> > Why not just make it a no-op for 2nd+ close()?
>
> To make a real-life analogy: when closing a closed door, we don't
> actually change it's state. It's a no-op. Nobody is surprised enough to
> say, "hey! That's illogical!"

Makes sense to me :)
I'll change it.