Reduce code indent in ResponseHandler.data_received

[bdraco]

What do these changes do?

Code cleanup only, no functional change

There were some else after returns that could be converted to guards to reduce code indent.

While looking at the full WebSockets path for #8258 I noticed this could be improved a bit

Are there changes in behavior for the user?

no

Is it a substantial burden for the maintainers to support this?

no

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 83.33333% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 98.42%. Comparing base (3c1ca45) to head (d586152).

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
aiohttp/client_proto.py	83.33%	2 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #8699   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.42%   98.42%           
=======================================
  Files         107      107           
  Lines       34699    34700    +1     
  Branches     4111     4111           
=======================================
+ Hits        34152    34153    +1     
  Misses        380      380           
  Partials      167      167           

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-GHA	98.31% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
OS-Linux	97.98% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
OS-Windows	96.37% <76.66%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
OS-macOS	97.66% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.10.11	97.75% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.10.15	97.69% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.11.10	97.58% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.11.9	97.64% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.12.6	98.03% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.9.13	97.64% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-3.9.20	97.58% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Py-pypy7.3.16	97.20% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
VM-macos	97.66% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
VM-ubuntu	97.98% <83.33%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
VM-windows	96.37% <76.66%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[bdraco]

Looks like we are missing coverage for tail

[Dreamsorcerer]

I feel like that relates to #8597 (comment) or one of my other parser changes. I'm not really sure if it's still possible to reach that code at all...

[bdraco]

I'll dig through the code paths this weekend if flights cooperate.

[bdraco]

Looks like websocket will never have a tail unless there is an exception

[bdraco]

I spent a few hours digging at it, and I can't find a case or make a case where tail exists and upgraded is False

[Dreamsorcerer]

Then I reckon remove it, but also skip the 3.10 backport as a precaution.

[bdraco]

Still having trouble getting comfortable with removing that code, need to spend a few more hours tracing