On 2010-03-04 16:27 , Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Mike Kent: >> However, I fail to understand his response that I must have meant try/ >> else instead, as this, as Mr. Kern pointed out, is invalid syntax. >> Perhaps Mr. Steinbach would like to give an example? > > OK. > > Assuming that you wanted the chdir to be within a try block (which it > was in your code), then to get code equivalent to my code, for the > purpose of a comparision of codes that do the same, you'd have to write > something like ... > > original_dir = os.getcwd() > try: > os.chdir(somewhere) > except Whatever: > # E.g. log it. > raise > else: > try: > # Do other stuff > finally: > os.chdir(original_dir) > # Do other cleanup > > ... which would be a more general case. > > I've also given this example in response to Robert earlier in the > thread. Although I haven't tried it I believe it's syntactically valid. > If not, then the relevant typo should just be fixed. :-) > > I have no idea which construct Robert thought was syntactically invalid. > I think that if he's written that, then it must have been something he > thought of. I was just trying to interpret what you meant by "Changing 'finally' to 'else' could make it equivalent." As far as I can tell, that has only one possible interpretation going by the plain meaning of the words, and it isn't yours. Since you always seem to refer to "try/else" as if it were an independent construct and not part of "try: except: else:" and no one else introduced except: clause, I must reiterate that your communications have been fabulously misleading. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4