Replies: 5 comments 4 replies
|
Well, that depends. The content could be excessively large, so we might(?) need to cap how much we'd include in the exception. Also it could be binary content, and it could be compressed. A good starting point would be to compare if |
|
Instead of always having it, providing a keyword argument to enable would also be fine with me. |
|
Any update on this? It would be a massive QoL improvement for users. As of right now my team is forced to consider |
|
I'm in the same position. |
|
Wouldn't a nice middle ground be to allow users to opt in to having the content included with a parameter to Since the docs is encouraging users to use raise_for_status chained as in the example below, I think that not being able to control this just renders this pattern quite useless. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
raise_for_statusonly gives information about status code but many times the response content contains useful information.It would be helpful it could also include the
contentinException.It could be configurable but I can't think of case where I don't want content to be printed in case of failure.
All reactions