It's a little similar to the reasoning behind PEP 618 (adding the `strict` argument to `zip`). A keyword argument is easier to add, and makes the code less ugly, then an `if` clause. When I don't have that `if` clause you mentioned in my code, it's not because I forgot, it's because I don't want an extra clause for something I don't think is going to happen. Also, a keyword argument enables code linters to enforce a rule that the `require` argument must always be specified. (Example <https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/zip-without-explicit-strict/>.) On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 1:45 PM Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't see how it's more likely that people would remember to add a `require=True` flag than to add `if m: raise RuntimeError("No match")`. The problem here is people forgetting that a match can fail, not lack of a means to handle that problem.
Paul
On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 at 11:38, Ram Rachum <ram@rachum.com> wrote:
Hey,
I bet this has been discussed before but I couldn't find it. I'd appreciate it if anyone could point me to that thread.
I'm sick of seeing "AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'foo'" whenever there's a `re.match` operation that fails while the code expects it to succeed. What do you think about a flag `require` such that `re.match(pattern, string, require=True)` would either return a match or raise an exception with an actually useful message?
Thanks, Ram. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/PLF46R... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/