Search Results

Search found 6686 results on 268 pages for 'liston catch'.

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 16/268 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

  • How to catch exceptions from another program (for logging)?

    - by CuriousCoder
    I am working on a tool that monitors a number of applications and ensures they are always running and in a clean state. Some of these applications have unhandled exceptions which do occur periodically and present the 'send crash report' window. I do not have the source code to these applications. Is there any mechanism I could use to catch the exceptions, or simply identify their exception type, as well as identify the application's main executable file that threw the exception. I'm not trying to do anything crazy like catch and handle it on the applications behalf, I'm simply trying to capture the exception type, log it and then restart the application.

    Read the article

  • How can I tell Visual Studio to not catch a particular exception?

    - by Noel Kennedy
    I have a particular type of exception that I would like Visual Studio to not catch with the Exception Assistant. Essentially I would like it just to let my normal exception handling infrastructure deal with it. The exception is an inheritor of System.Exception which I wrote and have the source code for. Any where this is thrown I want VS to not catch it, ie it is not useful to just supress a single throw new BlahException(); in code. This is because the exception is thrown a lot, and I don't want to have to supress every single instance individually. In case it makes a difference I am on Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate, Framework 3.5 SP1.

    Read the article

  • How do I catch the exception in windows application in c#?

    - by user291169
    Where should we catch exception • In Layer Boundary (UI-BLL & BLL-DAL) • In that methods where there is no interaction between Layers only some business logic present How do I write exception in Save/Delete where some DML statement executing? • What should I write in DAL end? • What should I write in BLL end? • What should I write in UI end? In Get/Load method How do we handle exception • What should I write in BLL end? • What should I write in UI end? Should I catch System exception?

    Read the article

  • How to catch any exception (System.Exception) without a warning in F#?

    - by LLS
    I tried to catch an Exception but the compiler gives warning: This type test or downcast will always hold let testFail () = try printfn "Ready for failing..." failwith "Fails" with | :? System.ArgumentException -> () | :? System.Exception -> () The question is: how to I do it without the warning? (I believe there must be a way to do this, otherwise there should be no warning) Like C# try { Console.WriteLine("Ready for failing..."); throw new Exception("Fails"); } catch (Exception) { }

    Read the article

  • Getting information about where c++ exceptions are thrown inside of catch block?

    - by tfinniga
    I've got a c++ app that wraps large parts of code in try blocks. When I catch exceptions I can return the user to a stable state, which is nice. But I'm not longer receiving crash dumps. I'd really like to figure out where in the code the exception is taking place, so I can log it and fix it. Being able to get a dump without halting the application would be ideal, but I'm not sure that's possible. Is there some way I can figure out where the exception was thrown from within the catch block? If it's useful, I'm using native msvc++ on windows xp and higher. My plan is to simply log the crashes to a file on the various users' machines, and then upload the crashlogs once they get to a certain size.

    Read the article

  • Exception Handling Frequency/Log Detail

    - by Cyborgx37
    I am working on a fairly complex .NET application that interacts with another application. Many single-line statements are possible culprits for throwing an Exception and there is often nothing I can do to check the state before executing them to prevent these Exceptions. The question is, based on best practices and seasoned experience, how frequently should I lace my code with try/catch blocks? I've listed three examples below, but I'm open to any advice. I'm really hoping to get some pros/cons of various approaches. I can certainly come up with some of my own (greater log granularity for the O-C approach, better performance for the Monolithic approach), so I'm looking for experience over opinion. EDIT: I should add that this application is a batch program. The only "recovery" necessary in most cases is to log the error, clean up gracefully, and quit. So this could be seen to be as much a question of log granularity as exception handling. In my mind's eye I can imagine good reasons for both, so I'm looking for some general advice to help me find an appropriate balance. Monolitich Approach class Program{ public static void Main(){ try{ Step1(); Step2(); Step3(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); } finally { CleanUp(); } } public static void Step1(){ ExternalApp.Dangerous1(); ExternalApp.Dangerous2(); } public static void Step2(){ ExternalApp.Dangerous3(); ExternalApp.Dangerous4(); } public static void Step3(){ ExternalApp.Dangerous5(); ExternalApp.Dangerous6(); } } Delegated Approach class Program{ public static void Main(){ try{ Step1(); Step2(); Step3(); } finally { CleanUp(); } } public static void Step1(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous1(); ExternalApp.Dangerous2(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } public static void Step2(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous3(); ExternalApp.Dangerous4(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } public static void Step3(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous5(); ExternalApp.Dangerous6(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } } Obsessive-Compulsive Approach class Program{ public static void Main(){ try{ Step1(); Step2(); Step3(); } finally { CleanUp(); } } public static void Step1(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous1(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous2(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } public static void Step2(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous3(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous4(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } public static void Step3(){ try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous5(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } try{ ExternalApp.Dangerous6(); } catch (Exception e) { Log(e); throw; } } } Other approaches welcomed and encouraged. Above are examples only.

    Read the article

  • In Javascript, what's better than try/catch for exiting an outer scope?

    - by gruseom
    In Javascript, I sometimes want to return a value from a scope that isn't the current function. It might be a block of code within the function, or it might be an enclosing function as in the following example, which uses a local function to recursively search for something. As soon as it finds a solution, the search is done and the whole thing should just return. Unfortunately, I can't think of a simpler way to do this than by hacking try/catch for the purpose: function solve(searchSpace) { var search = function (stuff) { solution = isItSolved(stuff); if (solution) { throw solution; } else { search(narrowThisWay(stuff)); search(narrowThatWay(stuff)); }; }; try { return search(searchSpace); } catch (solution) { return solution; }; }; I realize one could assign the solution to a local variable and then check it before making another recursive call, but my question is specifically about transfer of control. Is there a better way than the above? Perhaps involving label/break?

    Read the article

  • How to catch this low level MySQL (?) error in PHP/Magento

    - by andnil
    When I'm executing the following statement in Magento with a really large $sku, the execution terminates without any errors thrown what so ever. There are no errors in either Magento's, Apache's or PHP's error logs. Mage::getModel('catalog/product')-loadByAttribute('sku', $sku); Question: How do I catch the error? I've tried to set custom error handlers, and for testing purposes I've also managed to trigger error situations where each of the error handler functions are invoked. But when running the previously mentioned Magento code with a large $sku, none of the error handling functions are executed. error_reporting( -1 ); set_error_handler( array( 'Error', 'captureNormal' ) ); set_exception_handler( array( 'Error', 'captureException' ) ); register_shutdown_function( array( 'Error', 'captureShutdown' ) ); For completeness, this is the $sku I'm passing to loadByAttribute(). (The sku is invalid, but that is not the issue) 1- 9685 0102046|1- 9685 1212100|1- 9685 1212092|1- 9685 1212096|1- 9685 1102100|1- 9685 1102108|1- 9685 1102112|1- 9685 1102092|1- 9685 0102048|1- 9685 0102054|1- 9685 0102056|1- 9685 0102058|1- 9685 1212104|1- 9685 1212108|1- 9685 0212058|1- 9685 0104050|1- 9685 0212050|1- 9685 0212056|1- 9685 0212044|1- 9685 0212048|1- 9685 0212052|1- 9685 0212054|1- 9685 1102104|1- 9685 1102124 Any insight into this matter is much appreciated! Update: Upon further investigation, this is the exact point in the code where execution terminates. when the foreach is executed I guess Magento goes into MySQL world and starts loading up data from the database. \Mage\Catalog\Model\Abstract.php public function loadByAttribute($attribute, $value, $additionalAttributes = '*') { $collection = $this->getResourceCollection() ->addAttributeToSelect($additionalAttributes) ->addAttributeToFilter($attribute, $value) ->setPage(1,1); foreach ($collection as $object) { // <--------------- HERE return $object; } return false; } Note, I'm ONLY interested in finding out how to properly CATCH these kinds of errors, not "fix" the logic. This is so that I can present a proper error message to the user. The example above with the malformed sku is contrived and I have no desire to make my Magento app work with those erroneous skus.

    Read the article

  • How to create a route that catch all pdf file?

    - by VinnyG
    I want to have my pdf files sent this way to my users : public ActionResult GetPDF( string filename ) { return File( filename, "application/pdf", Server.HtmlEncode( filename ) ); } But I don't know how to create a route that will catch all the different pdf file in my site? Thanks a lot for the help!

    Read the article

  • Why should I not wrap every block in "try"-"catch"?

    - by Konrad
    I have always been of the belief that if a method can throw an exception then it is reckless not to protect this call with a meaningful try block. I just posted 'You should ALWAYS wrap calls that can throw in try, catch blocks.' to this question and was told that it was 'remarkably bad advice' - I'd like to understand why. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Java: how to access assignments in try-catch -loop?

    - by HH
    $ javac TestInit2.java TestInit2.java:13: variable unknown might not have been initialized System.out.println(unknown); ^ 1 error Code import java.util.*; import java.io.*; public class TestInit2 { public static void main(String[] args){ String unknown; try{ unknown="cannot see me, why?"; }catch(Exception e){ e.printStackTrace(); } System.out.println(unknown); } }

    Read the article

  • How to catch 'exceptions' for out of order execution in Workflow Foundation 4?

    - by Alex Key
    Hi, I am attempting to model a worklfow using a "WCF Workflow Service" in .net / vs 2010 that needs to handle out of order execution gracefully (but not allow it - if thath makes sense!?) For example I have 2 receive activities one called Initialize and the other called GetValue inside a FlowChart. In most cases Initialize should be called first and GetValue after (as modled in the flow chart). However if GetValue is executed before Initialize I do not want to return an "out of order" exception (although when I look at the WCF test client, I can't actually see an exception). But instead a custom exception saying something like "you must initialize first". In theory I could model this with lots of parallel activities and conditions to check if Initialized / Running / Terminated etc. But the business process I am modelling if very very similar to a state machine... except it must handle people executing things in the wrong order. Ideally I would like to catch the "out of order" exception (thought I don't think it's really an exception as such), check the 'exception' to see which function was attempted to run and then handle it. I have done some research around enabling AllowBufferedReceive. However I don't want to be able to execute out of order (I don't think), but instead give a detailed response if it does happen. I've looked at the new beta state machine template for WF 4 - but i'm not sure if it does what i'm after? I'm not sure if I have the wrong end of the stick, so any help would be greatly appreciated. [EDIT] To help clarify... Sorry it's a tricky one to explain. The standard I am trying to implement (the e-learning standard SCORM RTE) is structured like a state machine i.e. certain functions can only be executed in certain states. However the standard specifies that if the calling clients tries to execute a function that it is not meant to, then a warning should be issued... for example "you cannot use GetValue(), because you have not yet Initialized". Ideally I'd like to structure the workflow as the theoretical state machine and not need to have to use multiple if/else's to handle all the scenarios where something could be executed out-of-order. I'd like to catch a out-of-order exception (but I don't think there is such an exception - as it's not in the debugger) and rethrow it.

    Read the article

  • Try catch finally blocks.. do i still need them?

    - by Phil
    I am handling errors via my global.asax in this method: Dim CurrentException As Exception CurrentException = Server.GetLastError() Dim LogFilePath As String = Server.MapPath("~/Error/" & DateTime.Now.ToString("dd-MM-yy.HH.mm") & ".txt") Dim sw As System.IO.StreamWriter = New System.IO.StreamWriter(LogFilePath) sw.WriteLine(DateTime.Now.ToString) sw.WriteLine(CurrentException.ToString()) sw.Close() In my code I currently have no other error handling. Should I still insert try, catch, finally blocks? Thanks.

    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 | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >