[Python-ideas] Allow accessing return value inside finally clause

[alex23]

On 26 Dec, 08:06, Ram Rachum <r... at rachum.com> wrote:
> Now of course, you can find other solutions to this problem. You can write
> a decorator to do the post-processing phase, or you could divide the whole
> thing into 2 functions. But I think that sometimes, the
> `finally`-postprocess idiom I propose will be the most succinct one.

I initially responded to say "use a decorator", but you're already
aware of the common pattern for dealing with this, and yet you'd
rather the language change instead?

> (Regarding lack of return value and propagating exceptions: This all sounds
> solvable to me. Why not let the `finally` clause detect what's going on and
> react appropriately? No `return` value? Don't postprocess. Exception
> raised? Don't interfere.)

People already struggle with understanding the semantics of try/
finally - you yourself demonstrated this in your first post by not
being away that the 'return value' may not be set - and you want to
make it _more_ magic?

You're a programmer. At the end of the day, you're going to have to do
_some_ "heavy" lifting by yourself. Assign your return values to an
object that performs the post-processing on demand. Create a context
manager that does it when it exits. Write a loop to decorate your
functions if typing @decorator is so strenuous.

Making Python less clear to save yourself some typing isn't a decent
trade off.