On 9/5/07, Karthik Gurusamy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sep 5, 11:17 am, James Stroud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > bambam wrote: > > > I have about 30 pages (10 * 3 pages each) of code like this > > > (following). Can anyone suggest a more compact way to > > > code the exception handling? If there is an exception, I need > > > to continue the loop, and continue the list. > > > > > Steve. > > > > > ----------------------------------- > > > for dev in devs > > > try: > > > dev.read1() > > > except > > > print exception > > > remove dev from devs > > > > > for dev in devs > > > try: > > > dev.read2() > > > > [etc.] > > > > My keen sense of pattern recognition tells me that all of your read's > > follow the same naming pattern--or was that just an accidental naming > > coincidence on your part for the sake of example? > > > > for i in xrange(number_of_reads): > > for dev in devs: > > try: > > _reader = getattr(dev, 'read%d' % i) > > _reader() > > except Exception, e: > > print e > > devs.remove(dev) > > I see in many of the solutions suggested above, the devs sequence/ > iterator is being modified while iterating. I know it is not defined > for interation over dictionary keys. Are they defined for other > collections like lists? > > Karthik
You're right, that's a bad thing. You should collect the "bad" devs in a separate list, and remove them outside the loop.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
