whitespace

Author: iritkatriel

peps/pep-0765.rst

@@ -208,15 +208,15 @@ and among them the script found 203 instances of control flow instructions in a
 ``continue``. Of these:
 
 - 46 are correct, and appear in tests that target this pattern as a feature (e.g.,
-tests for linters that detect it).
+  tests for linters that detect it).
 - 8 seem like they could be correct - either intentionally swallowing exceptions
-or appearing where an active exception cannot occur. Despite being correct, it is
-not hard to rewrite them to avoid the bad pattern, and it would make the code
-clearer: deliberately swallowing exceptions can be more explicitly done with
-``except BaseException:``, and ``return`` which doesn't swallow exceptions can be
-moved after the ``finally`` block.
+  or appearing where an active exception cannot occur. Despite being correct, it is
+  not hard to rewrite them to avoid the bad pattern, and it would make the code
+  clearer: deliberately swallowing exceptions can be more explicitly done with
+  ``except BaseException:``, and ``return`` which doesn't swallow exceptions can be
+  moved after the ``finally`` block.
 - 149 were clearly incorrect, and can lead to unintended swallowing of exceptions.
-These are analyzed in the next section.
+  These are analyzed in the next section.
 
 **The Error Cases**
 
@@ -280,8 +280,8 @@ from the code maintainers:
 - 20 received reactions acknowleding the problem as one worth looking into.
 - 3 replied that the code is no longer maintained so this won't be fixed.
 - 2 closed the issue as "works as intended", one said that they intend to
-swallow all exceptions, but the other seemed unaware of the distinction
-between ``Exception`` and ``BaseException``.
+  swallow all exceptions, but the other seemed unaware of the distinction
+  between ``Exception`` and ``BaseException``.
 
 One issue was linked to a pre-existing open issue about non-responsiveness to Ctrl-C,
 conjecturing a connection.
@@ -297,17 +297,17 @@ contact the authors in these cases, so we will need to assess the difficulty of
 making these changes ourselves.
 
 - In `mosaicml<https://github.com/mosaicml/composer/blob/694e72159cf026b838ba00333ddf413185b4fb4f/composer/cli/launcher.py#L590>`__
-there is a return in a finally at the end of the ``main`` function, after an ``except:``
-clause which swallows all exceptions. The return in the finally would swallow
-an exception raised from within the ``except:`` clause, but this seems to be the
-intention in this code. A possible fix would be to assign the return value to a
-variable in the ``finally`` clause, dedent the ``return`` statement and wrap the
-body of the ``except:`` clause by another ``try``-``except`` to swallow any
-exceptions from within it.
+  there is a return in a finally at the end of the ``main`` function, after an ``except:``
+  clause which swallows all exceptions. The return in the finally would swallow
+  an exception raised from within the ``except:`` clause, but this seems to be the
+  intention in this code. A possible fix would be to assign the return value to a
+  variable in the ``finally`` clause, dedent the ``return`` statement and wrap the
+  body of the ``except:`` clause by another ``try``-``except`` to swallow any
+  exceptions from within it.
 
 - In `webtest<https://github.com/Pylons/webtest/blob/617a2b823c60e8d7c5f6e12a220affbc72e09d7d/webtest/http.py#L131>`__
-there is a ``finally`` block that contains only ``return False``. It could be replaced
-by
+  there is a ``finally`` block that contains only ``return False``. It could be replaced
+  by
 
 .. code-block::
 
@@ -316,28 +316,28 @@ by
     return False
 
 - In `kivy<https://github.com/kivy/kivy/blob/3b744c7ed274c1a99bd013fc55a5191ebd8a6a40/kivy/uix/codeinput.py#L204>`__
-there is a ``finally`` that contains only a ``return`` statement. Since there is also a
-bare ``except`` just before it, in this case the fix will be to just remove the ``finally:``
-block and dedent the ``return`` statement.
+  there is a ``finally`` that contains only a ``return`` statement. Since there is also a
+  bare ``except`` just before it, in this case the fix will be to just remove the ``finally:``
+  block and dedent the ``return`` statement.
 
 - In `logilab-common<https://forge.extranet.logilab.fr/open-source/logilab-common/-/blob/branch/default/test/data/module.py?ref_type=heads#L60>`__
-there is, once again, a ``finally`` clause that can be replace by an ``except BaseException``
-with the ``return`` dedented one level.
+  there is, once again, a ``finally`` clause that can be replace by an ``except BaseException``
+  with the ``return`` dedented one level.
 
 - In `pluggy<https://github.com/pytest-dev/pluggy/blob/c760a77e17d512c3572d54d368fe6c6f9a7ac810/src/pluggy/_callers.py#L141>`__
-there is a lengthy ``finally`` with two ``return`` statements (the second on line 182). Here the
-return value can be assigned to a variable, and the ``return`` itself can appear after we've
-exited the ``finally`` clause.
+  there is a lengthy ``finally`` with two ``return`` statements (the second on line 182). Here the
+  return value can be assigned to a variable, and the ``return`` itself can appear after we've
+  exited the ``finally`` clause.
 
 - In `aws-sam-cli<https://github.com/aws/aws-sam-cli/blob/97e63dcc2738529eded8eecfef4b875abc3a476f/samcli/local/apigw/local_apigw_service.py#L721>`__
-there is a conditional return at the end of the block.
-From reading the code, it seems that the condition only holds when the exception has
-been handled. The conditional block can just move outside of the ``finally`` block and
-achieve the same effect.
+  there is a conditional return at the end of the block.
+  From reading the code, it seems that the condition only holds when the exception has
+  been handled. The conditional block can just move outside of the ``finally`` block and
+  achieve the same effect.
 
 - In `scrappy<https://github.com/scrapy/scrapy/blob/52c072640aa61884de05214cb1bdda07c2a87bef/scrapy/utils/gz.py#L27>`__
-there is a ``finally`` that contains only a ``break`` instruction. Assuming that it was the intention
-to swallow all exceptions, it can be replaced by
+  there is a ``finally`` that contains only a ``break`` instruction. Assuming that it was the intention
+  to swallow all exceptions, it can be replaced by
 
 .. code-block::
 
@@ -377,11 +377,11 @@ The results indicate that ``return``, ``break`` and ``continue`` in a finally bl
 I thank:
 
 - Alyssa Coghlan for
-`bringing this issue my attention<https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-760-no-more-bare-excepts/67182/97>`__.
+  `bringing this issue my attention<https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-760-no-more-bare-excepts/67182/97>`__.
 
 - Guido van Rossum and Hugo van Kemenade for the
-`script<https://github.com/faster-cpython/tools/blob/main/scripts/download_packages.py>`__
-that downloads the most popular PyPI packages.
+  `script<https://github.com/faster-cpython/tools/blob/main/scripts/download_packages.py>`__
+  that downloads the most popular PyPI packages.
 
 - The many code authors I contacted for their responsiveness and grace.