On Sun., 6 Jan. 2019, 13:39 Simon <simon.bordeyne@gmail.com wrote:

I was writing some python code earlier, and I noticed that in a code that looks somwhat like this one :

    try:
        i = int("string")
        print("continued on")
        j = int(9.0)
    except ValueError as e:
        print(e)

>>> "invalid literal for int() with base 10: 'string'"

this code will handle the exception, but the code in the try block will not continue.

I propose to be able to use the continue keyword to continue the execution of the try block even when an error is handled. The above could then be changed to :

In terms of implementation, I think continue would be problematic

while true:
    try:
        x = foo()
        return x
    except:
        continue

is already valid code. You'd need some way of disambiguating, either a keyword or parameter to continue. Both of which would require a very big benefit for us to do, given the ecosystem impact that such things have.


    try:
        i = int("string")
        print("continued on")
        j = int(9.0)
    except ValueError as e:
        print(e)
        continue

>>> "invalid literal for int() with base 10: 'string'"
>>> "continued on"

Exception handling is not internally line orientated,  so this proposed resume functionality doesn't map exactly. But if the following in the same way as what you envision:

def handle(f, *args):
    try:
        return f(*args)
    except ValueError as e:
        print(e)

i = handle( int, "string")
handle(print, "continued on")
j = handle(int, 9.0)

Then I have to say I'm not sure what you are trying to solve. Is it the verbosity? Is it the flow control?