Suggestion for (re)try statement

[Rocco Moretti]

Sori Schwimmer wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think that would be useful to have an improved
> version of the "try" statement, as follows:
> 
> try(retrys=0,timeout=0):
>   # things to try
> except:
>   # what to do if failed
> 
> and having the following semantic:
> 
> for i in range(retrys):
>   try:
>     # things to try
>   except:
>     if i < retrys:
>       i += 1
>       sleep(timeout)
>     else:
>       # what to do if failed
>   else:
>     break

The gold standard for language syntax changes is "compelling use cases" 
- if introduced, how often will the construct be used? Is there a python 
program out there (preferably in the standard library) which would be 
*markedly* improved by the change? What is so repugnant about the 
equivalent, currently valid way of writing it? -- Hypothetical and 
theoretical arguments don't carry much weight in the Python community 
("Practicality beats purity" and all that.)

And remember - your goal isn't ultimately to convince me or someother 
person on comp.lang.python, it's to convince Guido.