Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

TRY300: Add some extra notes on not catching exceptions you didn't expect #15036

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

TRY300: Add some extra notes on not catching exceptions you didn't expect #15036

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion crates/ruff_linter/src/rules/tryceratops/rules/try_consider_else.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -13,7 +13,9 @@ use crate::checkers::ast::Checker;
/// ## Why is this bad?
/// The `try`-`except` statement has an `else` clause for code that should
/// run _only_ if no exceptions were raised. Using the `else` clause is more
/// explicit than using a `return` statement inside of a `try` block.
/// explicit than using a `return` statement inside of a `try` block. In general,
/// it is better to only have code which you expect could throw an exception inside
/// a `try` block to avoid accidentally catching something you didn't expect.
///
/// ## Example
/// ```python
Expand Down
Loading