On 6/12/12 14:58:01, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Thomas Rachel > <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa...@spamschutz.glglgl.de> > wrote: >> > Am 06.12.2012 09:49 schrieb Bruno Dupuis: >> > >>> >> The point is Exceptions are made for error handling, not for normal >>> >> workflow. I hate when i read that for example: >>> >> >>> >> try: >>> >> do_stuff(mydict[k]) >>> >> except KeyError: >>> >> pass >> > >> > I would do >> > >> > try: >> > value = mydict[k] >> > except KeyError: >> > pass >> > else: >> > do_stuff(k) >> > >> > Why? Because do_stuff() might raise a KeyError, which should not go >> > undetected.
> (Assuming first off that you meant "do_stuff(value)", not > "do_stuff(k)", in that last line) > That has quite different functionality, though. The original wouldn't > have called do_stuff at all if k is not in dict, behaviour which is > matched by both his EAFP and his LBLY. But your version, in the event > of a KeyError, will call do_stuff with the previous value of value, or > raise NameError if there is no such previous value. I don't think > that's intentional. Errhm, no. Look again. The do_stuff(value) call is in the "else:" clause, so it will only be done of there was no Exception of any kind, and in that case the assignment to value must have succeeded. -- HansM -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
