This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author gd2shoe
Recipients gd2shoe
Date 2012-08-29.01:37:15
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1346204236.32.0.579082427996.issue15804@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I'm constantly finding myself writing itty-bitty try blocks like such:

process stuff
try : someSubProcess.kill()
except : pass
process stuff

I realize this isn't a rigorous use of except, but it's good enough for a vast majority of what I need it for.  Still, it adds excess verbiage and makes code slightly harder to read.

All I need except to do most of the time is suppress exceptions.  I think the language could be enhanced by making the except clause implicit.

the above would become:

process stuff
try : someSubProcess.kill()
process stuff

The intent remains clear.  The code is cleaner and easier to read.

This does not happen often in rigorous code, but grep does find 3 counts in standard modules and 9 counts in numpy.  I'm certain most prototype code (like mine) would greatly benefit.  (My current 300 line project uses 4 so far.)
History
Date User Action Args
2012-08-29 01:37:16gd2shoesetrecipients: + gd2shoe
2012-08-29 01:37:16gd2shoesetmessageid: <1346204236.32.0.579082427996.issue15804@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2012-08-29 01:37:15gd2shoelinkissue15804 messages
2012-08-29 01:37:15gd2shoecreate