Break or exit out of "with" statement?

Since break can only occur inside a loop your options are somewhat limited inside the with to:

• return (put “with” + associated statements inside function)
• exit (bail from program – probably not ideal)
• exception (generate exception inside “with”, catch below)

Having a function and using return is probably the cleanest and easiest solution here if you can isolate the with and the associated statements (and nothing else) inside a function.

Otherwise generate an exception inside the with when needed, catch immediately below/outside the with to continue the rest of the code.

Update: As OP suggests in the comments below (perhaps tonuge in cheek?) one could also wrap the with statement inside a loop to get the break to work – though that would be semantically misleading. So while a working solution, probably not something that would be recommend).

You could put everything inside a function, and when the condition is true call a return.

f = open("somefile","r")
for line in f.readlines():
       if somecondition: break;
f.close()

I dont think you can break out of the with… you need to use a loop…

[edit] or just do the function method others mentioned

I think you should just restructure the logic:

with open(path) as f:
    print 'before condition checked'
    if not <condition>:
        print 'after condition checked'

as shorthand snippet:

class a:
    def __enter__(self):
        print 'enter'
    def __exit__(self ,type, value, traceback):
        print 'exit'

for i in [1]:
    with a():
        print("before")
        break
        print("after")

…

enter
before
exit

with giving you trouble? Throw more with-able objects at the problem!

class fragile(object):
    class Break(Exception):
      """Break out of the with statement"""

    def __init__(self, value):
        self.value = value

    def __enter__(self):
        return self.value.__enter__()

    def __exit__(self, etype, value, traceback):
        error = self.value.__exit__(etype, value, traceback)
        if etype == self.Break:
            return True
        return error

Just wrap the expression you’re going to with with fragile, and raise fragile.Break to break out at any point!

with fragile(open(path)) as f:
    print 'before condition'
    if condition:
        raise fragile.Break
    print 'after condition'

Benefits of this setup

• Uses with and just the with; doesn’t wrap your function in a semantically misleading one-run ‘loop’ or a narrowly specialized function, and doesn’t force you to do any extra error handling after the with.
• Keeps your local variables available, instead of having to pass them to a wrapping function.

• Nestable!

  with fragile(open(path1)) as f:
      with fragile(open(path2)) as g:
          print f.read()
          print g.read()
          raise fragile.Break
          print "This wont happen"
      print "This will though!"
  

  This way, you don’t have to create a new function to wrap the outer with if you want both to break.

• Doesn’t require restructuring at all: just wrap what you already have with fragile and you’re good to go!

Downsides of this setup

• Doesn’t actually use a ‘break’ statement. Can’t win em all 😉

This is an ancient question, but this is an application for the handy “breakable scope” idiom. Just imbed your with statement inside:

for _ in (True,):
    with open(path) as f:
        print 'before condition'
        if <condition>: break
        print 'after condition'

This idiom creates a “loop”, always executed exactly once, for the sole purpose of enclosing a block of code inside a scope that can be broken out of conditionally. In OP’s case, it was a context manager invocation to be enclosed, but it could be any bounded sequence of statements that may require conditional escape.

The accepted answer is fine, but this technique does the same thing without needing to create a function, which is not always convenient or desired.

There exists a function __exit__() for this purpose. Syntax is as follows:

with VAR = EXPR:
  try:
    BLOCK
  finally:
    VAR.__exit__()

Change from “break” to “f.close”

with open(path) as f:
    print('before condition')
    if <condition>: f.close()
    print('after condition')

Use while True:

while True:
    with open(path) as f:
        print 'before condition'
        if <condition>: 
            break 
        print 'after condition n'
    break

Here is another way of doing it using try and except, even though inverting the condition is probably more convenient.

class BreakOut(Exception): pass

try:
    with open(path) as f:
        print('before condition')
        if <condition>: 
            raise BreakOut #syntax error!
        print('after condition')
except BreakOut:
    pass

This question was asked before Python 3.4 existed but with 3.4 you can use contextlib.supress,
suppressing your own personal exception.

See that this (runnable as is) code

from contextlib import suppress

class InterruptWithBlock(UserWarning):
    """To be used to interrupt the march of a with"""

condition = True
with suppress(InterruptWithBlock):
    print('before condition')
    if condition: raise InterruptWithBlock()
    print('after condition')

# Will not print 'after condition` if condition is True.

So with the code in the question, you’d do:

with suppress(InterruptWithBlock) as _, open(path) as f:
    print('before condition')
    if <condition>: raise InterruptWithBlock()
    print('after condition')

Note: If you’re (still) before 3.4, you can still make your own suppress context manager easily.