Guido van Rossum wrote: > [François Pinard] >> It happens once in a while that I want to comment out the except clauses >> of a try statement, when I want the traceback of the inner raising, for >> debugging purposes. Syntax forces me to also comment the `try:' line, >> and indent out the lines following the `try:' line. And of course, the >> converse operation once debugging is done. This is slightly heavy. > > I tend to address this by substituting a different exception. I don't > see the use case common enough to want to allow dangling try-suites.
Easy enough, adding "raise" at the top of the except clause also solves the problem. >> P.S. - Another detail, while on this subject. On the first message I've read >> on this topic, the original poster wrote something like: >> >> f = None >> try: >> f = action1(...) >> ... >> finally: >> if f is not None: >> action2(f) >> >> The proposed syntax did not repeat this little part about "None", quoted >> above, so suggesting an over-good feeling about syntax efficiency. >> While nice, the syntax still does not solve this detail, which occurs >> frequently in my experience. Oh, I do not have solutions to offer, but >> it might be worth a thought from the mighty thinkers of this list :-) > > I don't understand your issue here. What is the problem with that > code? Perhaps it ought to be rewritten as > > f = action1() > try: > ... > finally: > action2(f) > > I can't see how this would ever do something different than your version. Well, in the original the call to action1 was wrapped in an additional try-except block. f = None try: try: f = action1() except: print "error" finally: if f is not None: action2(f) Reinhold -- Mail address is perfectly valid! _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com