Kent Johnson wrote:
> Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
>> Jeff Younker wrote:
>
>>> The enclosing try block isn't needed. More on this later.
>
>> Maybe it is my poor understanding of exception handling. My intention
>> here is to open the first file, if error then report in logging and
>> finish normally, else open the 2nd file, if error then report in logging
>> close the 1st file and finish normally. If no error then process.
>
> The code is correct for what you want to do. It does seem a bit awkward
> but it's hard to get much better and preserve the logging.
>
Yes, I guessed so.
> You could use 'return' instead of 'raise' and eliminate the outer try block.
>
> You could put the duplicate code in a function (with raise):
> def my_open(f):
> try :
> fIncl = open(f)
> except Exception, e :
> logging.error('Error!!! No pude abrir "%s" : %s',
> f,
> e.strerror)
> raise
>
> but you would still need try/except in the calling function:
>
> try :
> fIncl = my_open(mensaje.direcciones)
> except:
> return
> try :
> fExcl = my_open(mensaje.excluidas)
> except:
> fIncl.close()
> return
>
AND the code would have an added depth that gives me no real benefit,
which is why I chose to do it that way. So long as meaning is not
obscured by complicated or lengthy code I'd rather keep it shallow.
> It is safe to omit the close() in this situation - the file will be
> closed by the OS when the program terminates - so you could use a single
> try block:
> try :
> fIncl = my_open(mensaje.direcciones)
> fExcl = my_open(mensaje.excluidas)
> except:
> return
True, I usually prefer to explicitly close the file anyway.
_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
