Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:58257
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain managedit.ie designates 209.85.214.42 as permitted sender)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of kiall@managedit.ie designates 10.205.117.141 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.205.117.141;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAORXhGJuhaLMvmu0_6fH7zZTXEJyrgwoMBRnBQi-7XSrtKX-_w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <01a901ccf622$0645f230$12d1d690$@alliantinternet.com>
 <CAGSj+QtVWzc50kZX=0q-CRukd73eZ1T0B9D8t7EejXMw_9Q4ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <fd6fc5212ceab7a265cb505039373a0d.squirrel@www.l-i-e.com> <CAL0xaBHDu3xNwdO7XwCRObXTZd_X192KgxAoFH_ZH2TTsPGZ6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGSj+QuiRojiYnzbE495EGaS_ZjBZF6y47SVL6tBFOBkFKtp+A@mail.gmail.com> <CAORXhGJuhaLMvmu0_6fH7zZTXEJyrgwoMBRnBQi-7XSrtKX-_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:54:26 +0000
Message-ID: <CAGSj+QswHaj+SjJRo3_s7Ns0gH3mUb7_W3Xw2zyNXGbnBPkK4g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Boutell <tom@punkave.com>
Cc: Arvids Godjuks <arvids.godjuks@gmail.com>, Richard Lynch <ceo@l-i-e.com>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cdfcbcc93b72404ba091567
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Possibility to add finally to try/catch?
From: kiall@managedit.ie (Kiall Mac Innes)

--000e0cdfcbcc93b72404ba091567
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Tom Boutell <tom@punkave.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Kiall Mac Innes <kiall@managedit.ie>
> wrote:
> > Yes, You could abstract the try/catch into a new (and un-needed) function
> > to try and emulate the behavior of finally.. Unless, for example, you
> > re-throw the exception after logging in the catch.
>
> 'finally' doesn't run for stuff that throws an exception not caught in
> the try { } block, or an exception thrown again in the catch { } block
> - does it?
>
> I would hope not, since that means "something this block of code did
> not anticipate at all - another sort of exceptional situation
> altogether" and really should not run any more local code, nothing
> until and unless there is a catch block somewhere further up that does
> catch that exception.
>

I would indeed expect the finally to run regardless of what happens in the
catch block.

$ python
>>> def divide(x, y):
...      try:
...          result = x / y
...      except ZeroDivisionError:
...          print "division by zero!"
...          raise Exception('division by zero')
...      else:
...          print "result is", result
...      finally:
...          print "executing finally clause"
...
>>> divide(2, 1)
result is 2
executing finally clause
>>>
>>> divide(2, 0)
division by zero!
executing finally clause <====== The interesting part
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
  File "<stdin>", line 6, in divide
Exception: division by zero
>>>
>>> divide("2", "1")
executing finally clause
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
  File "<stdin>", line 3, in divide
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for /: 'str' and 'str'

--000e0cdfcbcc93b72404ba091567--