(original) (raw)

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Michel Desmoulin
<desmoulinmichel@gmail.com> wrote:
\>
\>
\> Le 29/11/2017 à 19:02, Barry Warsaw a écrit :
\>> On Nov 29, 2017, at 12:40, David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
\>>
\>>> I think some syntax could be possible to only "catch" some exceptions and let others propagate. Maybe:
\>>>
\>>> val = name.strip()\[4:\].upper() except (AttributeError, KeyError): -1
\>>>
\>>> I don't really like throwing a colon in an expression though. Perhaps some other word or symbol could work instead. How does this read:
\>>>
\>>> val = name.strip()\[4:\].upper() except -1 in (AttributeError, KeyError)
\>>
\>> I don’t know whether I like any of this but I think a more natural spelling would be:
\>>
\>> val = name.strip()\[4:\].upper() except (AttributeError, KeyError) as -1
\>>
\>> which could devolve into:
\>>
\>> val = name.strip()\[4:\].upper() except KeyError as -1
\>>
\>> or:
\>>
\>> val = name.strip()\[4:\].upper() except KeyError # Implicit \`as None\`
\>>
\>> I would \*not\* add any spelling for an explicit bare-except equivalent. You would have to write:
\>>
\>> val = name.strip()\[4:\].upper() except Exception as -1
\>>
\>> Cheers,
\>> -Barry
\>>
\>
\> I really like this one. It's way more general. I can see a use for
\> IndexError as well (lists don't have the dict.get() method).
\>
\> Also I would prefer not to use "as" this way. In the context of an
\> exception, "as" already binds the exception to a variable so it's confusing.
\>
\> What about:
\>
\>
\> val = name.strip()\[4:\].upper() except Exception: -1

That happens to be the exact syntax recommended by PEP 463 (modulo
some distinguishing parentheses).

https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0463/

ChrisA

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org