21 make errors example into a function

[Scottan]

I've made it into a function and updated some of the text

Any thoughts on replacing:

def check_value(val):
    if val>0 and val<10:
        print('Value: ', val, 'is a digit.')
    elif val==0:
        print('Value ', val, 'is nul')
    else:
        print('Value: ', val, 'is a number.')

with:

def check_sign(val):
    if val == 0:
        print('Value: ', val, 'is zero.')
    elif val > 0:
        print('Value ', val, 'is positive')
    else:
        print('Value: ', val, 'is negative.')

I personally think it's a clearer and less distracting test, see #21.

I also wonder if we should add a note saying it is usually a good idea to put the try / except statements inside the function, but we are going to leave them outside the function for these examples

[github-actions]

Thank you!

Thank you for your pull request 😃

🤖 This automated message can help you check the rendered files in your submission for clarity. If you have any questions, please feel free to open an issue in {sandpaper}.

If you have files that automatically render output (e.g. R Markdown), then you should check for the following:

• 🎯 correct output
• 🖼️ correct figures
• ❓ new warnings
• ‼️ new errors

Rendered Changes

🔍 Inspect the changes: https://github.com/UoMResearchIT/programming_with_python/compare/md-outputs..md-outputs-PR-56

The following changes were observed in the rendered markdown documents:

 05-defensive_programming.md | 56 +++++++++++++++------------------------------
 md5sum.txt                  |  2 +-
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)

What does this mean?

If you have source files that require output and figures to be generated (e.g. R Markdown), then it is important to make sure the generated figures and output are reproducible.

This output provides a way for you to inspect the output in a diff-friendly manner so that it's easy to see the changes that occur due to new software versions or randomisation.

⏱️ Updated at 2025-11-14 12:01:52 +0000