try: finally: question

OKB (not okblacke) BrenBarn at
Fri Jul 16 03:51:21 CEST 2004

Tim Peters wrote:

> Not because it can't be defined clearly, but
> because any way of defining it is so arbitrary it leaves half of
> programmers believing that the other way of defining it was "the only
> obvious" way.  Don't allow mixing except with finally, and the
> programmer has to be explicit about their intent.  That was (and
> remains) a Pythonic solution.

    	Out of curiosity, what would be wrong with allowing both, but 
insisting that the finally block (if it exists ) must come last?  The 
code layout would then clearly suggest the semantics: the finally comes 
last.  This is the thing I most often want to write anyway.

--OKB (not okblacke)
Brendan Barnwell
"Do not follow where the path may lead.  Go, instead, where there is
no path, and leave a trail."
	--author unknown

More information about the Python-list mailing list