-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34.4k
gh-148278: Fix try except block bug #148333
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.
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
Open
Shubham-Developer02
wants to merge
2
commits into
python:main
Choose a base branch
from
Shubham-Developer02:fix_try_except_exception_bug_148278
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+63
−0
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions
4
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core_and_Builtins/2026-04-10-12-00-00.gh-issue-148278.4Kp9mN.rst
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ | ||
| Fix exception table coverage for ``try`` blocks: pseudo ``SETUP_FINALLY`` and | ||
| ``POP_BLOCK`` instructions are now labeled with the active handler, so | ||
| ``continue`` inside ``try``/``except`` and other minimal try bodies handle | ||
| pending exceptions and tracing like the rest of the protected region. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems a little manual rather than actually facing the problem itself. Let's say if it was:
then it would be a problem because the line would just go back to the previous line instead of the try block, which means that this isn't the right fix for the problem, it's just a workaround for a specific fix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall I think the code is not only fixing a specific problem, but it also seems a bit excessive the way it is trying to tackle the issue of:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I may be wrong, I think we should do some tests and such for this, like regression tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As feedback, I would like to suggest a possible simplification, I think there could be more room for simplification here, also maybe apart of the function names as well, a bit repetitive in my opinion, however it is your choice to keep that. I also would like to add my thought on the code logic itself, which I think does not broadly apply to all cases, so we can try further discussing some ways on improving the code so that it reaches more use cases more reliably.