Search Results

Search found 19541 results on 782 pages for 'event handling'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 105/782 | < Previous Page | 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112  | Next Page >

  • How to catch this type of exceptions ?

    - by Lukas Šalkauskas
    I'm starting getting tired of this exception. Can't handle it, even so I'm using this: AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException += new UnhandledExceptionEventHandler(CurrentDomain_UnhandledException); Still no success, Can anyone explain me, how I should handle it in a nice way. Or how to detect that it have fired this message and close the application, because I'm starting it automatically everytime it closes.

    Read the article

  • Where is this exception caught and handled?

    - by Zaki
    In some code I've been reading, I've come across this : class Someclass { public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException { //all other code here...... } } If main() throws an exception, in this case its an IOException, where is it caught and handled?

    Read the article

  • Thoughts on try-catch blocks

    - by John Boker
    What are your thoughts on code that looks like this: public void doSomething() { try { // actual code goes here } catch (Exception ex) { throw; } } The problem I see is the actual error is not handled, just throwing the exception in a different place. I find it more difficult to debug because i don't get a line number where the actual problem is. So my question is why would this be good? ---- EDIT ---- From the answers it looks like most people are saying it's pointless to do this with no custom or specific exceptions being caught. That's what i wanted comments on, when no specific exception is being caught. I can see the point of actually doing something with a caught exception, just not the way this code is.

    Read the article

  • What should I do if a IOException is thrown?

    - by Roman
    I have the following 3 lines of the code: ServerSocket listeningSocket = new ServerSocket(earPort); Socket serverSideSocket = listeningSocket.accept(); BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(serverSideSocket.getInputStream())); The compiler complains about all of these 3 lines and its complain is the same for all 3 lines: unreported exception java.io.IOException; In more details, these exception are thrown by new ServerSocket, accept() and getInputStream(). I know I need to use try ... catch .... But for that I need to know what this exceptions mean in every particular case (how should I interpret them). When they happen? I mean, not in general, but in these 3 particular cases.

    Read the article

  • Exception handling in Linq to SQL for customers without orders

    - by stackoverflowuser
    I have the following code to retrieve customer name, total (orders ), sum (order details) for reach customer in Northwind database. The problem with below code is that it raises an exception since a few customers dont have any entry in orders table. I know using the query syntax (join) the exception can be avoided. I want to know if the same can be handled with the extension method syntax. var customerOrders = db.Customers .Select(c => new { CompanyName = c.CompanyName, TotalOrders = c.Orders.Count(), TotalQuantity = c.Orders .SelectMany(o => o.Order_Details).Sum(o=>o.Quantity) });

    Read the article

  • Event handling for a dynamically added user control

    - by francisf
    Hi, I have a user control say SearchVendor.ascx which contains 4 buttons a gridview and another user control. I need to load the control dynamically actually as a modal pop up I get this code VendorProductSearch uc = Page.LoadControl("~/Controls/Proposal/VendorProductSearch.ascx") as VendorProductSearch; uc.ShowVendorProductSearch(true); _tempPlaceHolder.Controls.Add(uc); it works fine the control gets loaded properly but onclick of any button the second time the control disappears ??? I want the dynamically added control to remain until the user clicks on the cancel button Any idea as to how to achive this ? Thanks & Regards, Francis P.

    Read the article

  • C# equivalent to VB.NET Catch ... When

    - by fung
    In VB.NET I often Catch ... When ... Try ' Some code' Catch e As ArgumentNullException When e.ParamName.ToUpper() = "SAMPLES" ' Handle the error' End Try Is there a C# equivalent to Catch ... When? I don't want to resort to using an if statement inside a catch if possible.

    Read the article

  • EHsc vc EHa (synchronous vs asynchronous exception handling)

    - by watson1180
    Could you give a bullet list of practical differences/implication? I read relevant MSDN article, but my understanding asynchronous exceptions is still a bit hazy. I am writing a test suite using Boost.Test and my compiler emits a warning that EHa should be enabled: warning C4535: calling _set_se_translator() requires /EHa The project itself uses only plain exceptions (from STL) and doesn't need /EHa switch. Do I have to recompile it with /EHa switch to make the test suite work properly? My feeling is that I need /EHa for the test suit only. Thank you and happy new year.

    Read the article

  • Handling Application Logic in Multiple AsyncTask onPostExecute()s

    - by stormin986
    I have three simultaneous instances of an AsyncTask for download three files. When two particular ones finish, at the end of onPostExecute() I check a flag set by each, and if both are true, I call startActivity() for the next Activity. I am currently seeing the activity called twice, or something that resembles this type of behavior. Since the screen does that 'swipe left' kind of transition to the next activity, it sometimes does it twice (and when I hit back, it goes back to the same activity). It's obvious two versions of the activity that SHOULD only get called once are being put on the Activity stack. The only way I can find that this is possible is if both AsyncTasks' onPostExecute() executed SO simultaneously that they were virtually running the same lines at the same time, since I set the 'itemXdownloaded' flag to true right before I check for both and call startActivity(). But this is happening enough that it's very hard for me to believe that both downloads are finishing precisely at the same time and having their onPostExecute()s so close together... Any thoughts on what could be going on here? General gist of code (details removed, ignore any syntactical errors I may have edited in): // In onPostExecute() switch (downloadID) { case DL1: dl1complete = true; break; case DL2: dl2complete = true; break; case DL3: dl3complete = true; break; } // If 1 and 2 are done, move on (DL3 still going in background) if ( downloadID != DL3 && dl1complete && dl2complete) { ParentClass.this.startActivity(new Intent(ParentClass.this, NextActivity.class)); }

    Read the article

  • Server.TransferRequest returns blank page on specific server

    - by jishi
    I'm facing an issue that seems to be related to configuration. I have a webapplication based on MonoRail, where we utilize the routing feature from MonoRail. On the first request after the application has started, the routing isn't initialized. To circumvent this, I have the following code in Application_OnError(): public virtual void Application_OnError() { if ( // identified as routing error ) Server.TransferRequest( Context.Request.RawUrl, false ); return; } Problem beeing that on our development server (which runs server 2008 R2, with IIS 7.5 and .NET 3.5) returns a blank page without headers, but on my workstation (which runs win7, IIS 7.5 and .NET 3.5) it works fine. What could be the cause of this? If the code in Application_OnError() throws an exception, what would be the expected output? I have verified the following: The access-log shows one entry, I'm not sure if a TransferRequest would show up as a second entry when invoked successfully The application actually do some work according to my internal logs, and it doesn't die since a subsequent requests works flawlessly (because routing will be active) Any hints on what to look for would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Asp.net error object not set to a reference

    - by Frank
    Hi all, Because I rush in development (a lot of whip cracking here) and declare my objects at the top of the function and instantiate inside my try-catch block, I get a lot of the good old "object not set to an instance of an object" errors while doing TDD, and later if I do miss a branch that object was used in (doing VB now, would prefer C#) or just in every day coding, object not set to an instance of an object is a bit vague. Sure the stack trace sends me to the line the error occured at, but it would be nice if I could modify my logging to either name the object or its type because sometimes I have multiple objects on the same line. It's not the end of the world, but in the end it would save me a few minutes each day. Any ideas on how I can pass the info on which object wasn't set? Thanks

    Read the article

  • iPhone: Error and error handling confusion in comparison.

    - by Mr. McPepperNuts
    NSArray *results = [managedObjectContext executeFetchRequest:request error:&error]; if(results == nil){ NSLog(@"No results found"); searchObj = nil; }else{ if ([[[results objectAtIndex:0] name] caseInsensitiveCompare:passdTextToSearchFor] == 0) { NSLog(@"results %@", [[results objectAtIndex:0] name]); searchObj = [results objectAtIndex:0]; }else { NSLog(@"No results found"); searchObj = nil; } } The code above compares data a user enters to data pulled from a database. If I enter data which is in the database; it works. But if I enter complete gibberish it returns the error below instead of "No results found." *** WebKit discarded an uncaught exception in the webView:shouldInsertText:replacingDOMRange:givenAction: delegate: <NSRangeException> *** -[NSCFArray objectAtIndex:]: index (0) beyond bounds (0) The results array being null should be accounted for during the checks in the above code, no?

    Read the article

  • c# eventhandling error

    - by bragin.www
    i have method private void getValues(object sender, EventArgs e) { int id = int.Parse(dgvTable.Rows[dgvTable.CurrentRow.Index].Cells[0].Value.ToString()); var values = from c in v.db.TotalDoc where c.TotalID == id select c.TotalAmount; dgvValues.DataSource = values; } and datagridview "dgvTable" error at this line dgvTable.CellClick += new EventHadler(getValues); error text is: No overload for 'getValues' matches delegate 'System.EventHandler' please help!

    Read the article

  • Is it safe to silently catch ClassCastException when searching for a specific value?

    - by finnw
    Suppose I am implementing a sorted collection (simple example - a Set based on a sorted array.) Consider this (incomplete) implementation: import java.util.*; public class SortedArraySet<E> extends AbstractSet<E> { @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") public SortedArraySet(Collection<E> source, Comparator<E> comparator) { this.comparator = (Comparator<Object>) comparator; this.array = source.toArray(); Collections.sort(Arrays.asList(array), this.comparator); } @Override public boolean contains(Object key) { return Collections.binarySearch(Arrays.asList(array), key, comparator) >= 0; } private final Object[] array; private final Comparator<Object> comparator; } Now let's create a set of integers Set<Integer> s = new SortedArraySet<Integer>(Arrays.asList(1, 2, 3), null); And test whether it contains some specific values: System.out.println(s.contains(2)); System.out.println(s.contains(42)); System.out.println(s.contains("42")); The third line above will throw a ClassCastException. Not what I want. I would prefer it to return false (as HashSet does.) I can get this behaviour by catching the exception and returning false: @Override public boolean contains(Object key) { try { return Collections.binarySearch(Arrays.asList(array), key, comparator) >= 0; } catch (ClassCastException e) { return false; } } Assuming the source collection is correctly typed, what could go wrong if I do this?

    Read the article

  • DUMP in unhandled C++ exception

    - by Jorge Vasquez
    In MSVC, how can I make any unhandled C++ exception (std::runtime_error, for instance) crash my release-compiled program so that it generates a dump with the full stack from the exception throw location? I have installed NTSD in the AeDebug registry an can generate good dumps for things like memory access violation, so the matter here comes down to crashing the program correctly, I suppose. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Can you catch exceeded allocated memory error before it kills the script?

    - by kristovaher
    The thing is that I want to catch memory problems before they happen. I have a system that gets rows from database and casts the returned associative array to a variable, but I never know what the size of the database result is is or how much memory it will take once the database request is made. This means that my software can fail simply because memory is exceeded. But I want to avoid that somehow. One of the ways is to obviously make database requests that are smaller, but what if this is not possible or what if I do not know the size of data that is returned from database? Is it possible to 'catch' situations where memory use is exceeded in PHP? Something like this: $requestOk=memory_test(function(){ return doSomething(); }); if($requestOk){ // Memory seems fine // $requestOk now has the value from memory_test() function } else { // Function would have exceeded memory } I just find it problematic that my script can just die at any moment because of memory issues. From what I know, try-catch cannot be used here because it is a fatal error. Any help would be appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Better way to ignore exception type: multiple catch block vs. type querying

    - by HuBeZa
    There are situations that we like to ignore a specific exception type (commonly ObjectDisposedException). It can be achieved with those two methods: try { // code that throws error here: } catch (SpecificException) { /*ignore this*/ } catch (Exception ex) { // Handle exception, write to log... } or try { // code that throws error here: } catch (Exception ex) { if (ex is SpecificException) { /*ignore this*/ } else { // Handle exception, write to log... } } What are the pros and cons of this two methods (regarding performance, readability, etc.)?

    Read the article

  • How should I re-raise a Delphi exception after logging it?

    - by Nik
    Do you know a way to trap, log, and re-raise exception in Delphi code? A simple example: procedure TForm3.Button1Click(Sender: TObject); begin try raise Exception.Create('Bum'); except on E: Exception do begin MyHandleException(E); end; end; end; procedure TForm3.MyHandleException(AException: Exception); begin ShowMessage(AException.Message); LogThis(AException.Message); // raise AException; - this will access violate end; So I need to re-raise it in the except block but I was wondering if there is a better way to write my own method to handle and (on specific conditions) to re-raise exceptions.

    Read the article

  • How can I intercept an exception occurred during serialization in WCF?

    - by bonomo
    I have a legit data object with all data contract / data member attributes. For some reason the WCF service crashes after the operation has completed and the result is passed as a return value. I believe it has something to do with WCF not being able to serialize that result properly. The test client doesn't say anything specific: The underlying connection was closed: The connection was closed unexpectedly. Server stack trace: at System.ServiceModel.Channels.HttpChannelUtilities.ProcessGetResponseWebException(WebException webException, HttpWebRequest request, HttpAbortReason abortReason) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.HttpChannelFactory.HttpRequestChannel.HttpChannelRequest.WaitForReply(TimeSpan timeout) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.RequestChannel.Request(Message message, TimeSpan timeout) at System.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.RequestChannelBinder.Request(Message message, TimeSpan timeout) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannel.Call(String action, Boolean oneway, ProxyOperationRuntime operation, Object[] ins, Object[] outs, TimeSpan timeout) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannelProxy.InvokeService(IMethodCallMessage methodCall, ProxyOperationRuntime operation) at System.ServiceModel.Channels.ServiceChannelProxy.Invoke(IMessage message) Exception rethrown at [0]: at System.Runtime.Remoting.Proxies.RealProxy.HandleReturnMessage(IMessage reqMsg, IMessage retMsg) at System.Runtime.Remoting.Proxies.RealProxy.PrivateInvoke(MessageData& msgData, Int32 type) at IFacade.PickSecurities(String pattern, Int32 atMost) at FacadeClient.PickSecurities(String pattern, Int32 atMost) Inner Exception: The underlying connection was closed: The connection was closed unexpectedly. at System.Net.HttpWebRequest.GetResponse() at System.ServiceModel.Channels.HttpChannelFactory.HttpRequestChannel.HttpChannelRequest.WaitForReply(TimeSpan timeout) I am in control of creating the instance of the service using a customized service host factory. I know I can set up trace listeners and check the logs, but it's a lot of hassle to do. So I would rather handle it explicitly on the server at the time it happens. So I how can I intercept that exception programmatically and return an appropriate fault meassage?

    Read the article

  • Communication between layers in an application

    - by Petar Minchev
    Hi guys! Let's assume we have the following method in the business layer. What's the best practice to tell the UI layer that something went wrong and give also the error message? Should the method return an empty String when it was OK, otherwise the error message, or should it throw another exception in the catch code wrapping the caught exception? If we choose the second variant then the UI should have another try,catch which is too much try,catch maybe. Here is a pseudocode for the first variant. public String updateSomething() { try { //Begin transaction here dataLayer.do1(); dataLayer.do2(); dataLayer.doN(); } catch(Exception exc) { //Rollback transaction code here return exc.message; } return ""; } Is this a good practice or should I throw another exception in the catch(then the method will be void)?

    Read the article

  • Handling input from a keyboard wedge

    - by JDibble
    Following on from the question asked by Mykroft Best way to handle input from a keyboard “wedge” http://stackoverflow.com/questions/42437/best-way-to-handle-input-from-a-keyboard-wedge. I need to write a class that intercepts key strokes, if the input is determined to be from the keyboard wedge (as described in the above post) the data will be directed to POS classes to handle, otherwise they keystrokes must be passed on to be handled in windows in the normal manner. This raises two questions How can I intercept key strokes when not in a WinForm. How can I pass on the keypresses to windows. Thanks JDibble

    Read the article

  • Catching specific vs. generic exceptions in c#

    - by Scott Vercuski
    This question comes from a code analysis run against an object I've created. The analysis says that I should catch a more specific exception type than just the basic Exception. Do you find yourself using just catching the generic Exception or attempting to catch a specific Exception and defaulting to a generic Exception using multiple catch blocks? One of the code chunks in question is below: internal static bool ClearFlags(string connectionString, Guid ID) { bool returnValue = false; SqlConnection dbEngine = new SqlConnection(connectionString); SqlCommand dbCmd = new SqlCommand("ClearFlags", dbEngine); SqlDataAdapter dataAdapter = new SqlDataAdapter(dbCmd); dbCmd.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure; try { dbCmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@ID", ID.ToString()); dbEngine.Open(); dbCmd.ExecuteNonQuery(); dbEngine.Close(); returnValue = true; } catch (Exception ex) { ErrorHandler(ex); } return returnValue; } Thank you for your advice EDIT: Here is the warning from the code analysis Warning 351 CA1031 : Microsoft.Design : Modify 'ClearFlags(string, Guid)' to catch a more specific exception than 'Exception' or rethrow the exception

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112  | Next Page >