Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most.
Learn more about CollectivesStack Internal
Knowledge at work
Bring the best of human thought and AI automation together at your work.
Explore Stack InternalI'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } finally { if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here // putting this in a finally-block is especially // important if there is a return in the try-block } } I'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } finally { if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here // putting this in a finally-block is especially // important if there is a return in the try-block } } I'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here } I'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } finally { if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here // putting this in a finally-block is especially // important if there is a return in the try-block } } EDIT: I don't think the finally is really necessary (just the if statement), since the purpose of the finally block is to execute regardless of any exceptions being thrown in the try block. Since you only want the code to execute on success, you could just have the if statement occur after the try-catch block. Ultimately, it comes down to putting the right code in the try block.
I'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } finally { if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here } } EDIT: I don't think the finally is really necessary (just the if statement), since the purpose of the finally block is to execute regardless of any exceptions being thrown in the try block. Since you only want the code to execute on success, you could just have the if statement occur after the try-catch block. Ultimately, it comes down to putting the right code in the try block.
I'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } finally { if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here // putting this in a finally-block is especially // important if there is a return in the try-block } } I'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } finally { if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here } } EDIT: I don't think the finally is really necessary (just the if statement), since the purpose of the finally block is to execute regardless of any exceptions being thrown in the try block. Since you only want the code to execute on success, you could just have the if statement occur after the try-catch block. Ultimately, it comes down to putting the right code in the try block.
I'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } finally { if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here } } EDIT: I don't think the finally is really necessary, since the purpose of the finally block is to execute regardless of any exceptions being thrown in the try block. Since you only want the code to execute on success, you could just have the if statement occur after the try-catch block. Ultimately, it comes down to putting the right code in the try block.
I'm not entirely convinced that I like it, but this would be equivalent of Python's else. It eliminates the problem's identified with putting the success code at the end of the try block.
bool success = true; try { something(); } catch (Exception e) { success = false; // other exception handling } finally { if (success) { // equivalent of Python else goes here } } EDIT: I don't think the finally is really necessary (just the if statement), since the purpose of the finally block is to execute regardless of any exceptions being thrown in the try block. Since you only want the code to execute on success, you could just have the if statement occur after the try-catch block. Ultimately, it comes down to putting the right code in the try block.