fix lint errors. Add Rationale headline

peps/pep-9999.rst

@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ this change, which did not exist at the time that :pep:`601`
 was rejected. It also proposes a slightly different solution
 than that which was proposed by :pep:`601`.
 
-Rationale
-=========
+Motivation
+==========
 
 The semantics of ``return``, ``break`` and ``continue`` in a
 finally block are surprising for many developers.
@@ -47,6 +47,9 @@ Indeed, :pep:`8` now recommends not to use control flow statements
 in a ``finally`` block, and linters such as pylint [2]_, ruff [3]_
 and flake8-bugbear [4]_ flag them as a problem.
 
+Rationale
+=========
+
 A recent analysis of real world code [5]_ shows that::
 
 - These features are rare (2 per million LOC in the top 8000 PyPI
@@ -63,7 +66,7 @@ Python itself moved them away from this harmful feature.
 One of the arguments brought up [6]_ in the discussion about :pep:`601`
 was that language features should be orthogonal, and combine without
 context-based restrictions. However, in the meantime :pep:`654` has
-been implemented, and it forbids `return`, `break` and `continue`
+been implemented, and it forbids ``return``, ``break`` and ``continue`
 in an ``except*`` clause because the semantics of that would violate
 the property that ``except*`` clauses operate *in parallel*, so the
 code of one clause should not suppress the invocation of another.
@@ -138,7 +141,7 @@ How to Teach This
 =================
 
 The change will be documented in the language spec and in the
-What's New documentation. The `SyntaxWarning` will alert users
+What's New documentation. The ``SyntaxWarning`` will alert users
 that their code needs to change. The empirical evidence [5]_
 shows that the changes necessary are typically quite
 straightforward.