Hi Jarkko, On 13 Apr 2020, at 20:04, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:02:20AM +0200, Ezra Buehler wrote: >> Hi Jarkko, >> >> On 12 Apr 2020, at 19:07, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 05:02:27PM +0200, Ezra Buehler wrote: >>>> Hi Jarkkon, >>>> >>>>> On 12 Apr 2020, at 16:36, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> + except ProtocolError(e): >>>> >>>> Should this not be >>>> >>>> except ProtocolError as e: >>> >>> Unless there is a functional difference, does it matter? >>> >>> /Jarkko >> >> Well, your patch confuses me a lot. It looks to me like you are passing >> the undefined `e` variable to the constructor. >> >> When I run flake8 on it I get following error (among others): >> >> F821 undefined name 'e' > > I don't know what flake8 is. https://flake8.pycqa.org/en/latest/ >> What I suggested is the standard syntax: >> https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/errors.html > > It passed the Python 3 interpreter. That is because it is technically valid syntax. >> Did you test this? You should get an error as soon as an exception >> occurs. > > Yes. Interpreter did not complain. I did not know that the language > is broken that way that you have to exercise the code path to get > a syntax error. That is due to the dynamic nature of Python. You won’t get a syntax error. You will get an exception: NameError: name 'e' is not defined Python has to assume that `e` might be defined at runtime. However, style checkers will complain. > > /Jarkko Cheers, Ezra.
