Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87r3uchjyg.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
References: <madpuv$he7$1@ger.gmane.org> <20150129113238.7eaa986d@bigbox.christie.dr> <mailman.18286.1422571931.18130.python-list@python.org> <87r3uchjyg.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
From: Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 02:11:36 -0700
Subject: Re: The Most Diabolical Python Antipattern
To: Python <python-list@python.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.18299.1422609145.18130.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 47
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:84871

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:16 PM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
> Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>:
>
>> At least use "except Exception" instead of a bare except. Do you
>> really want things like SystemExit and KeyboardInterrupt to get turned
>> into 0?
>
> How about:
>
> ==============================
>     try:
>         do_interesting_stuff()
>     except ValueError:
>         try:
>             log_it()
>         except:
>             pass
>         raise
> ==============================

Are you asking if I think this is better? It still swallows arbitrary
exceptions. Why would you want to re-raise the anticipated (and
logged) ValueError instead of the exception that could potentially be
unexpected?

> Surprisingly this variant could raise an unexpected exception:
>
> ==============================
>     try:
>         do_interesting_stuff()
>     except ValueError:
>         try:
>             log_it()
>         finally:
>             raise
> ==============================
>
> A Python bug?

This does what it is supposed to. "If no expressions are present,
raise re-raises the last exception that was active in the current
scope." In this case, what that exception is depends on whether the
finally clause was entered as a result of an exception or fall-through
from the try clause. If you only want to re-raise the ValueError, then
use the first form above. If you only want to re-raise the other
exception, then do so from an except block (or don't catch it in the
first place).