Create exception routine if module not found Python - python

I have a simple Python programm. This programm contains two functions, that can be called by using programm.function_1() from a second programm. If a user types package.function_01() the attribute error 'module not found' comes up. I want to except that error and call the function help().
Where do I have to insert my try - except routine to handle the attribute error?
Thanks in advance!

Surround the code that can break with a try ... except block. You may call your Exception handler under the except SomeException: clause
Take a look into Python exception docs enter link description here

Related

How to make python not close it self after error, python exception

I have made an program in python that i converted into .exe using auto-py-to-exe and im wondering how to stop .exe stop closing it self after an error (python exception) the .exe closes it self in the speed of light and you cant read the error.
Does someone knows how to make it not close it self?
using input doesnt work if the exception happens in a pip library
Thanks
You can use a try-except based system (that you have to build suitably to catch every exception of your code) and to print the exception you can use the module traceback like so:
try:
## code with error ##
except Exception:
print("Exception in user code:")
print("-"*60)
traceback.print_exc(file=sys.stdout)
print("-"*60)
or you could use a simpler form like:
try:
## code with error ##
except Exception as e:
print(e, file='crash log.txt')
that only prints the error class (like file not found).
I should also point out that the finally keyword exists with the purpose of executing code either if an exception arose or not:
try:
## code with error ##
except: #optional
## code to execute in case of exception ##
finally:
## code executed either way ##
Something you could do on top of that is logging everything your program does with
print(status_of_program, file=open('log.txt','a'))
this is useful to see exactly at what point the program has crashed and in general to see the program in action step by step.
But a thing you should do is properly test the program while in .py form and if it works you could possibly assume the error comes from the actual exportation method and consult the documentation or try exporting simpler programs to catch the difference (and so the error).
i'd suggest to consult:
https://docs.python.org/3/library/exceptions.html
to learn the error types and the try-except construct.
If input() doesn't work try using sys.stdout().
I gather that this is a console app. If it's a GUI app, you can use a similar approach but the details will be different.
The approach I'd use is to set sys.excepthook to be your own function that prints the exception, then waits for input. You can call the existing exception hook to actually do the printing.
import sys, traceback as tb
oldhook = sys.excepthook
def waitexcepthook(type, exception, traceback):
oldhook(type, exception, traceback)
input()
sys.excepthook = waitexcepthook

python ignore whichever line that causes error and continue running the code after that line

I understand the try/except method. What I'm trying to do is:
try:
some_func1() #potentially raises error too
do_something_else() #error was raised
continue_doing_something_else() #continues here after handling error
except:
pass
In the above code, when the error is raised at do_something_else(), the error is handled but then the try statement is exited.
What I want is for python to continue whatever code that is after the line that causes the error. Assuming that an error can happen anywhere in the try statement so I can't just wrap the try/except around do_something_else() itself, is there a way to do this in python?
What you want to do (try with restart) is not possible in Python. Lisp can do it (http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/beyond-exception-handling-conditions-and-restarts.html), and you can implement it in Scheme using call/cc.
Just put the code that you want to do after the possible exception after the except. You may want to use finally (see https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/errors.html for the documentation):
try:
some_func1()
do_something_else() #error was raised
except:
handle_exception()
finally:
continue_doing_something_else() #continues here after handling error or if no error occurs
if continue_doing_something_else() can also throw exceptions, then put that in a try/except too:
try:
some_func1()
do_something_else() #error was raised
except:
handle_exception1()
try:
continue_doing_something_else()
except:
handle_exception2()
finally:
any_cleanup()
as a general rule, your exception handling should be kept as small in scope as possible while remaining sensible, consider excepting only the 'expected' exceptions and not all of them (e.g. except OSError: when attempting to open files)

why do we use 'pass' in error handling of python?

It is conventional to use pass statement in python like the following piece of code.
try:
os.makedirs(dir)
except OSError:
pass
So, 'pass' bascially does not do anything here. In this case, why would we still put a few codes like this in the program? I am confused. Many thanks for your time and attention.
It's for the parser. If you wrote this:
try:
# Code
except Error:
And then put nothing in the except spot, the parser would signal an error because it would incorrectly identify the next indentation level. Imagine this code:
def f(x):
try:
# Something
except Error:
def g(x):
# More code
The parser was expecting a statement with a greater indentation than the except statement but got a new top-level definition. pass is simply filler to satisfy the parser.
This is in case you want the code to continue right after the lines in the try block. If you won't catch it - it either skips execution until it is caught elsewhere - or fails the program altogether.
Suppose you're creating a program that attempts to print to a printer, but also prints to the standard output - you may not want it to file if the printer is not available:
try:
print_to_printer('hello world')
except NoPrinterError:
pass # no printer - that's fine
print("hello world")
If you would not use a try-catch an error would stop execution until the exception is caught (or would fail the program) and nothing would be printed to standard output.
The pass is used to tell the program what to do when it catches an error. In this particular case you're pretty much ignoring it. So you're running your script and if you experience an error keep going without worrying as to why and how.
That particular case is when you are definite on what is expected. There are other cases where you can break and end the program, or even assign the error to a variable so you can debug your program by using except Error as e.
try:
os.makedirs(dir)
except OSError:
break
or:
try:
os.makedirs(dir)
except OSError as e:
print(str(e))
try:
# Do something
except:
# again some code
# few more code
There are two uses of pass. First, and most important use :- if exception arises for the code under try, the execution will jump to except block. And if you have nothing inside the except block, it will throw IndentationError at the first place. So, to avoid this error, even if you have nothing to do when exception arises, you need to put pass inside except block.
The second use, if you have some more code pieces after the try-except block (e.g. again some code and few more code), and you don't put pass inside except, then that code piece will not be executed (actually the whole code will not be executed since compiler will throw IndentationError). So, in order to gracefully handle the scenario and tell the interpreter to execute the lines after except block, we need to put pass inside the except block, even though we don't want to do anything in case of exception.
So, here pass as indicated from name, handles the except block and then transfers the execution to the next lines below the except block.

confusing exception behavior in python

I have some django code that resembles this (this is python 2.7.1)
try:
a = some_model.objects.get(some_field='foo') #this could except if for some reason it doesn't exist
method_that_throws_exception() #it won't reach this if we get a DoesNotExist
except some_model.DoesNotExist:
#if it doesn't exist create it then try again
a = some_model.objects.create(....)
try:
method_that_throws_exception() #this time lets say another exception is raised by method
print 'this should not print right?'
except Exception as e:
logging.error("error msg here")
The problem is the "this should not print" line is still being printed. I'm confused by this. I feel like I am probably overlooking something very simple but might be having some tunnel vision at the moment. Thanks in advance.
Update: also if I remove the nested try block the print below the call to the method that throws an exception still prints.
I figured it out, the method had a try block inside of it that Iw asn't raising out. adding raise in my exception handler inside the method_that_throws_exception() fixed my problem.

Python reraise/recatch exception

I would like to know if it is possible in python to raise an exception in one except block and catch it in a later except block. I believe some other languages do this by default.
Here is what it would look like"
try:
something
except SpecificError as ex:
if str(ex) = "some error I am expecting"
print "close softly"
else:
raise
except Exception as ex:
print "did not close softly"
raise
I want the raise in the else clause to trigger the final except statement.
In actuality I am not printing anything but logging it and I want to log more in the case that it is the error message that I am not expecting. However this additional logging will be included in the final except.
I believe one solution would be to make a function if it does not close softly which is called in the final except and in the else clause. But that seems unnecessary.
What about writing 2 try...except blocks like this:
try:
try:
something
except SpecificError as ex:
if str(ex) == "some error I am expecting"
print "close softly"
else:
raise ex
except Exception as ex:
print "did not close softly"
raise ex
Only a single except clause in a try block is invoked. If you want the exception to be caught higher up then you will need to use nested try blocks.
As per python tutorial there is one and only one catched exception per one try statement.
You can find pretty simple example in tutorial that will also show you how to correctly use error formatting.
Anyway why do you really need second one? Could you provide more details on this?
You can do this using the six package.
Six provides simple utilities for wrapping over differences between Python 2 and Python 3.
Specifically, see six.reraise:
Reraise an exception, possibly with a different traceback. In the simple case, reraise(*sys.exc_info()) with an active exception (in an except block) reraises the current exception with the last traceback. A different traceback can be specified with the exc_traceback parameter. Note that since the exception reraising is done within the reraise() function, Python will attach the call frame of reraise() to whatever traceback is raised.

Categories