Returning and raising are mutually exclusive.
Raising SystemExit will end the script. A few cleanup routines get to run, and if the caller really, really wants to, they can catch the SystemExit and cancel it, but mostly, you can think of it as stopping execution right there. The caller will never get a chance to see a return value or do anything meaningful with it.
Returning means you want the script to continue. Continuing might mean having the caller raise SystemExit, or it might mean ignoring the error, or it might mean something else. Whatever it means is up to you, as you're the one writing the code.
Finally, are you sure you should be handling this error at all? Catching an exception only to turn it into a system shutdown may not be the most useful behavior. It's not a user-friendly way to deal with problems, and it hides all the useful debugging information you'd get from a stack trace.
Answer from user2357112 on Stack Overflowpython - How to return a value and raise an Exception - Stack Overflow
Manually raising (throwing) an exception in Python - Stack Overflow
python - How to raise a ValueError? - Stack Overflow
I need help on how to raise a value error
Hello everyone,
I am fairly new to Python so this question might seem a little stupid. For an assignment, I have to define a function which puts an x value into three categories A, B, C based on the input entered (I called it parameter).
def generic_function(parameter):
if parameter > 1:
raise ValueError("Parameter too high: PARAMETER. The maximum parameter is 1.")
elif parameter >= 0.6:
x = 'A'
elif parameter >= 0.4:
x = 'B'
elif parameter >= 0.0:
x = 'C'
return xThe issue I have is raising the ValueError when the entered value is greater than 1. I would like that the self-made error message includes the parameter I entered as input into the function.For example, if I enter 2, it should raise a ValueError and display it in the message after the colons.
ValueError("Parameter too high: 2. The maximum parameter is 1.")I'd be grateful for answers and I hope I explained the problem thouroughly.
Returning and raising are mutually exclusive.
Raising SystemExit will end the script. A few cleanup routines get to run, and if the caller really, really wants to, they can catch the SystemExit and cancel it, but mostly, you can think of it as stopping execution right there. The caller will never get a chance to see a return value or do anything meaningful with it.
Returning means you want the script to continue. Continuing might mean having the caller raise SystemExit, or it might mean ignoring the error, or it might mean something else. Whatever it means is up to you, as you're the one writing the code.
Finally, are you sure you should be handling this error at all? Catching an exception only to turn it into a system shutdown may not be the most useful behavior. It's not a user-friendly way to deal with problems, and it hides all the useful debugging information you'd get from a stack trace.
You can raise an error with a 'returning_value' argument to be used after the calling.
Another pythonic answer to your problem could be to make use of the error arguments in the raise and then, in your call manage the error to get the value, convert it from string and get your 'return-ish'.
def your_f():
try:
some_io_thingy_ok()
return 1
except IOError:
raise SystemExit("FOOBAR", 0)
try:
my_returning_value = your_f()
except SystemExit as err:
my_returning_value = err.args[1]
print(my_returning_value)
From Python 3 docs :
When an exception occurs, it may have an associated value, also known as the exception’s argument. The presence and type of the argument depend on the exception type.
The except clause may specify a variable after the exception name. The variable is bound to an exception instance with the arguments stored in instance.args. For convenience, the exception instance defines str() so the arguments can be printed directly without having to reference .args. One may also instantiate an exception first before raising it and add any attributes to it as desired.
How do I manually throw/raise an exception in Python?
Use the most specific Exception constructor that semantically fits your issue.
Be specific in your message, e.g.:
raise ValueError('A very specific bad thing happened.')
Don't raise generic exceptions
Avoid raising a generic Exception. To catch it, you'll have to catch all other more specific exceptions that subclass it.
Problem 1: Hiding bugs
raise Exception('I know Python!') # Don't! If you catch, likely to hide bugs.
For example:
def demo_bad_catch():
try:
raise ValueError('Represents a hidden bug, do not catch this')
raise Exception('This is the exception you expect to handle')
except Exception as error:
print('Caught this error: ' + repr(error))
>>> demo_bad_catch()
Caught this error: ValueError('Represents a hidden bug, do not catch this',)
Problem 2: Won't catch
And more specific catches won't catch the general exception:
def demo_no_catch():
try:
raise Exception('general exceptions not caught by specific handling')
except ValueError as e:
print('we will not catch exception: Exception')
>>> demo_no_catch()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
File "<stdin>", line 3, in demo_no_catch
Exception: general exceptions not caught by specific handling
Best Practices: raise statement
Instead, use the most specific Exception constructor that semantically fits your issue.
raise ValueError('A very specific bad thing happened')
which also handily allows an arbitrary number of arguments to be passed to the constructor:
raise ValueError('A very specific bad thing happened', 'foo', 'bar', 'baz')
These arguments are accessed by the args attribute on the Exception object. For example:
try:
some_code_that_may_raise_our_value_error()
except ValueError as err:
print(err.args)
prints
('message', 'foo', 'bar', 'baz')
In Python 2.5, an actual message attribute was added to BaseException in favor of encouraging users to subclass Exceptions and stop using args, but the introduction of message and the original deprecation of args has been retracted.
Best Practices: except clause
When inside an except clause, you might want to, for example, log that a specific type of error happened, and then re-raise. The best way to do this while preserving the stack trace is to use a bare raise statement. For example:
logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)
try:
do_something_in_app_that_breaks_easily()
except AppError as error:
logger.error(error)
raise # just this!
# raise AppError # Don't do this, you'll lose the stack trace!
Don't modify your errors... but if you insist.
You can preserve the stacktrace (and error value) with sys.exc_info(), but this is way more error prone and has compatibility problems between Python 2 and 3, prefer to use a bare raise to re-raise.
To explain - the sys.exc_info() returns the type, value, and traceback.
type, value, traceback = sys.exc_info()
This is the syntax in Python 2 - note this is not compatible with Python 3:
raise AppError, error, sys.exc_info()[2] # avoid this.
# Equivalently, as error *is* the second object:
raise sys.exc_info()[0], sys.exc_info()[1], sys.exc_info()[2]
If you want to, you can modify what happens with your new raise - e.g. setting new args for the instance:
def error():
raise ValueError('oops!')
def catch_error_modify_message():
try:
error()
except ValueError:
error_type, error_instance, traceback = sys.exc_info()
error_instance.args = (error_instance.args[0] + ' <modification>',)
raise error_type, error_instance, traceback
And we have preserved the whole traceback while modifying the args. Note that this is not a best practice and it is invalid syntax in Python 3 (making keeping compatibility much harder to work around).
>>> catch_error_modify_message()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
File "<stdin>", line 3, in catch_error_modify_message
File "<stdin>", line 2, in error
ValueError: oops! <modification>
In Python 3:
raise error.with_traceback(sys.exc_info()[2])
Again: avoid manually manipulating tracebacks. It's less efficient and more error prone. And if you're using threading and sys.exc_info you may even get the wrong traceback (especially if you're using exception handling for control flow - which I'd personally tend to avoid.)
Python 3, Exception chaining
In Python 3, you can chain Exceptions, which preserve tracebacks:
raise RuntimeError('specific message') from error
Be aware:
- this does allow changing the error type raised, and
- this is not compatible with Python 2.
Deprecated Methods:
These can easily hide and even get into production code. You want to raise an exception, and doing them will raise an exception, but not the one intended!
Valid in Python 2, but not in Python 3 is the following:
raise ValueError, 'message' # Don't do this, it's deprecated!
Only valid in much older versions of Python (2.4 and lower), you may still see people raising strings:
raise 'message' # really really wrong. don't do this.
In all modern versions, this will actually raise a TypeError, because you're not raising a BaseException type. If you're not checking for the right exception and don't have a reviewer that's aware of the issue, it could get into production.
Example Usage
I raise Exceptions to warn consumers of my API if they're using it incorrectly:
def api_func(foo):
'''foo should be either 'baz' or 'bar'. returns something very useful.'''
if foo not in _ALLOWED_ARGS:
raise ValueError('{foo} wrong, use "baz" or "bar"'.format(foo=repr(foo)))
Create your own error types when apropos
"I want to make an error on purpose, so that it would go into the except"
You can create your own error types, if you want to indicate something specific is wrong with your application, just subclass the appropriate point in the exception hierarchy:
class MyAppLookupError(LookupError):
'''raise this when there's a lookup error for my app'''
and usage:
if important_key not in resource_dict and not ok_to_be_missing:
raise MyAppLookupError('resource is missing, and that is not ok.')
Don't do this. Raising a bare
Exceptionis absolutely not the right thing to do; see Aaron Hall's excellent answer instead.
It can't get much more Pythonic than this:
raise Exception("I know Python!")
Replace Exception with the specific type of exception you want to throw.
See the raise statement documentation for Python if you'd like more information.
raise ValueError('could not find %c in %s' % (ch,str))
Here's a revised version of your code which still works plus it illustrates how to raise a ValueError the way you want. By-the-way, I think find_last(), find_last_index(), or something simlar would be a more descriptive name for this function. Adding to the possible confusion is the fact that Python already has a container object method named __contains__() that does something a little different, membership-testing-wise.
def contains(char_string, char):
largest_index = -1
for i, ch in enumerate(char_string):
if ch == char:
largest_index = i
if largest_index > -1: # any found?
return largest_index # return index of last one
else:
raise ValueError('could not find {!r} in {!r}'.format(char, char_string))
print(contains('mississippi', 's')) # -> 6
print(contains('bababa', 'k')) # ->
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "how-to-raise-a-valueerror.py", line 15, in <module>
print(contains('bababa', 'k'))
File "how-to-raise-a-valueerror.py", line 12, in contains
raise ValueError('could not find {} in {}'.format(char, char_string))
ValueError: could not find 'k' in 'bababa'
Update — A substantially simpler way
Wow! Here's a much more concise version—essentially a one-liner—that is also likely faster because it reverses (via [::-1]) the string before doing a forward search through it for the first matching character and it does so using the fast built-in string index() method. With respect to your actual question, a nice little bonus convenience that comes with using index() is that it already raises a ValueError when the character substring isn't found, so nothing additional is required to make that happen.
Here it is along with a quick unit test:
def contains(char_string, char):
# Ending - 1 adjusts returned index to account for searching in reverse.
return len(char_string) - char_string[::-1].index(char) - 1
print(contains('mississippi', 's')) # -> 6
print(contains('bababa', 'k')) # ->
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "better-way-to-raise-a-valueerror.py", line 9, in <module>
print(contains('bababa', 'k'))
File "better-way-to-raise-a-valueerror", line 6, in contains
return len(char_string) - char_string[::-1].index(char) - 1
ValueError: substring not found
This is impossible. A function can either return a value or raise an exception. It cannot do both. Calling return or raise will absolutely terminate the function.
You could encode a return value inside the exception message, like this:
raise SomeException('my value is 5')
Or you could return a tuple of an exception and a value:
return (SomeException('hello'), 5)
It does not make sense but In case you need it.
def your_method(self):
......
try:
raise ValueError('Max Iter Reached')
except ValueError as e:
return value
Hi there,
I’ve recently been trying to write type safe code by enforcing strict mypy checking.
In doing so, I’ve realised some holes in my general code style and want to make it A) consistent throughout the code base and B) do it the most pythonic way.
I’m using this with c extension APIs so I’m just going to make up some very contrived examples
Let’s say we have a function which fetches an instance of an object
def get_item(name: str) -> ItemClass:
if item := api.get_item({‘name’: name}):
return itemI have to try retrieve the object- at this point I may have the object or I may have “None” or “False” depending on the call.
Using mypy, it requires a return call at the end of the function (a good thing imo). So naturally I add “return None”
But now of course I have to change my function signature.
def get_item(name: str) -> Optional[ItemClass]:
if item := api.get_item({‘name’: name}):
return item
return NoneThis works, and it still boils down to me having to check the truthyness of the returned value from my function, but I’m wondering if the more pythonic thing to do would be to raise an exception instead of returning None.
What is the communities feeling of best practice? And especially how it ties into writing code that is robust
Many thanks for your time