On 2019-05-24 09:25, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfr...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
On Fri, 24 May 2019 07:49:23 +0200, Cecil Westerhof <ce...@decebal.nl>
declaimed the following:
I did not do that consciously, because I have to try until it is
successful an I return, or I reached the max tries and re-raise the
exception. With a for loop I could exit the loop and cannot re-raise
the exception.
Your /success/ branch exits the loop by executing a "return" statement.
Your /fail/ branch exits the loop by "raise" on the third failure.
A "for" loop would have the same behavior; you just replace the manual
initialization and increment of the loop counter.
for tries in range(max_try):
try:
do something
return successful
except stuff:
if tries+1 == max_try: #since range is 0..max_try-1
raise
You never "fall off the end" of the loop.
That is true, but by using a 'while True:' loop it is clear you never
fall off the end of the loop. I find this much clearer. And when there
is a bug you get into an endless loop instead of fall of the end.
Which in my opinion is easier to spot and mend. And endless loop is
noticed the moment it goes wrong. Falling of the end could go without
an error and will be spotted much later.
You could print a message or raise an exception after the 'for' loop so
that if it ever falls off the end of the loop you'll get a nice message
instead of it just looping forever! :-)
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
