Thanks for the feedback everyone. I've only encountered the use case once,
like you've mentioned it's probably not worth the effort given that it's
such a small problem space.
Thanks again!
On Tue, Jan 4, 2022, 00:18 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 11:31:30PM -0500, elvis kah
On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 11:31:30PM -0500, elvis kahoro wrote:
> I was hoping there could be some syntax to extend pattern matching to
> handle exceptions such that we could handle patterns with multiple types of
> exceptions like so:
>
> match *this_raises_an_exception*, *this_raises_another_exce
On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 3:32 PM elvis kahoro wrote:
>>
>> Reading between the lines, I *think* that you want the match statement
>> to catch the exception that you get when the attribute lookup fails, am
>> I right?
>
> Yes!
>
> I was hoping there could be some syntax to extend pattern matching to
>
> Reading between the lines, I *think* that you want the match statement
> to catch the exception that you get when the attribute lookup fails, am
> I right?
Yes!
I was hoping there could be some syntax to extend pattern matching to
handle exceptions such that we could handle patterns with mult
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> I propose:
>
> match expression:
> except exceptions:
> block
> # regular cases follow after the except block
I probably would rarely use this syntax (preferring the explicit
temporary, and possibly encapsulating the exception handl
Hi Elvis,
On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 12:59:32AM -0500, elvis kahoro wrote:
> The functionality that I'm thinking about is:
>
> match (named_tuple_object.*missing_attribute*, a_random_string):
> case *AttributeError*, "Catching an attribute error":
> print("Catches as attribute error")
Dear The PEP Community,
Happy New Year!
I'm assuming there's been discussions on this already! I checked the
current PEP list and issue tracker, but to no avail.
*Can someone point me to wherever it has or is taking place?*
The functionality that I'm thinking about is:
match (named_tuple_objec
