Search Results

Search found 34195 results on 1368 pages for 'try'.

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 2/1368 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • in C# try -catch , can't catch the exception

    - by sunglim
    below code can't catch the exception. does catch can't catch the exception which occured in the function? try { Arche.Members.Feedback.FeedbackBiz_Tx a = new Arche.Members.Feedback.FeedbackBiz_Tx(); a.AddFreeSubscriptionMember(itemNo, buyerID, itemName, DateTime.Today, DateTime.Today); } catch(Exception ex) { RegisterAlertScript(ex.Message); } ... public void AddFreeSubscriptionMember(string itemNo, string buyerID, string itemName, DateTime fsStartDate, DateTime fsEndDate) { FeedbackBiz_NTx bizNTx = new FeedbackBiz_NTx(); if (bizNTx.ExistFreeSubscription(buyerID, itemNo)) { throw new Exception("Exception."); }

    Read the article

  • Enclosing service execution in try-catch: bad practice?

    - by Sorin Comanescu
    Hi, Below is the usual Program.cs content for a windows service program: static class Program { /// <summary> /// The main entry point for the application. /// </summary> static void Main() { ServiceBase[] ServicesToRun; ServicesToRun = new ServiceBase[] { new MyService() }; ServiceBase.Run(ServicesToRun); } } Is it a bad practice to enclose the ServiceBase.Run(...) in a try-catch block? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Weird bug in Java try-catch-finally

    - by kcr
    I'm using JODConverter to convert .xls and .ppt to .pdf format. For this i have code something like try{ //do something System.out.println("connecting to open office"); OpenOfficeConnection connection = new SocketOpenOfficeConnection(8100); System.out.println("connection object created"); connection.connect(); System.out.println("connection to open office successful"); //do something if(!successful) throw new FileNotFoundException(); }catch(Exception e){ System.out.println("hello here"); System.out.println("Caught Exception while converting to PDF "); LOGGER.error("Error in converting media" + e.getMessage()); throw new MediaConversionFailedException(); }finally{ decode_pdf.closePdfFile(); System.out.println("coming in finally"); //do something here } My Output : connecting to open office connection object created coming in finally P.S. return type of method is void How is it possible ? Even if there is some problem in connection.connect(), it s'd come in catch block. confused

    Read the article

  • Powershell: error handling with try and catch

    - by resolver101
    I'm writing a script and want to control the errors. However im having trouble finding information on error handling using the try, catch. I want to catch the specific error (shown below) and then perform some actions and resume the code. What code is needed for this? This is the code i am running and im entering in a invalid username when prompted. Get-WMIObject Win32_Service -ComputerName localhost -Credential (Get-Credential) Get-WmiObject : User credentials cannot be used for local connections At C:\Users\alex.kelly\AppData\Local\Temp\a3f819b4-4321-4743-acb5-0183dff88462.ps1:2 char:16 + Get-WMIObject <<<< Win32_Service -ComputerName localhost -Credential (Get-Credential) + CategoryInfo : InvalidOperation: (:) [Get-WmiObject], ManagementException + FullyQualifiedErrorId : GetWMIManagementException,Microsoft.PowerShell.Commands.GetWmiObjectCommand

    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

  • Enclosing service execution in try-catch

    - by Sorin Comanescu
    Hi, Below is the usual Program.cs content for a windows service program: static class Program { /// <summary> /// The main entry point for the application. /// </summary> static void Main() { ServiceBase[] ServicesToRun; ServicesToRun = new ServiceBase[] { new MyService() }; ServiceBase.Run(ServicesToRun); } } Is it a bad practice to enclose the ServiceBase.Run(...) in a try-catch block? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • I can't boot into Ubuntu "Try (hd0,0): NTFS5: No ang0" Error Message

    - by Joe
    I recently installed Ubuntu 12.04 alongside windows 7. It was working fine but now when I try to boot with ubuntu after the operating system choice screen I get this. Boot Error Message Try (hd0,0): NFTS5: No ang0 Try (hd0,1): NTFS5: No ang0 Try (hd0,2): NTFS5: No ang0 Try (hd0,3): Extended: Try (hd0,4): NTFS5: No ang0 Try (hd0,5): Extended: Try (hd0,5): EXT2: And when I press ctrl+alt+del it restarts the computer and if I chose to boot with ubuntu same thing happens again. But windows works fine.. How do I resolve this problem? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Check If You Are Eligible To Try Amazon Fire TV Free for 30 days

    - by Gopinath
    Re/Code first broke the story of Amazon offering its customers to try Amazon Fire TV free for 30 days. The Amazon Fire TV costs $99 but with this offer you get a chance to try it for 30 days without paying any money. After 30 days if you are interested you can keep it with you by paying $99 otherwise you can return it to Amazon. All the costs associated with shipping to your home as well as returning back to Amazon are covered by the offer, which means it’s a real FREE offer to try! This offer is not available for everyone, but selected customers are receiving emails from Amazon. If you are interested to try free Amazon TV either you may wait to receive an offer email or click on this link to check if you are eligible. I verified it today and it says that I’m not eligible for this offer. Try your luck and all the best.

    Read the article

  • Why can't I write just a try with no catch or finally?

    - by Camilo Martin
    Sometimes I do this and I've seen others doing it too: VB: Try DontWannaCatchIt() Catch End Try C#: try { DontWannaCatchIt(); } catch {} I know I should catch every important exception and do something about it, but sometimes it's not important to - or am I doing something wrong? Is this usage of the try block incorrect, and the requirement of at least one catch or finally block an indication of it?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Begin Try

    - by Derek Dieter
    The try catch methodology of programming is a great innovation for SQL 2005+. The first question you should ask yourself before using Try/Catch should be “why?”. Why am I going to use Try/Catch? Personally, I have found a few uses, however I must say I do fall into the category of not [...]

    Read the article

  • Validating data to nest if or not within try and catch

    - by Skippy
    I am validating data, in this case I want one of three ints. I am asking this question, as it is the fundamental principle I'm interested in. This is a basic example, but I am developing best practices now, so when things become more complicated later, I am better equipped to manage them. Is it preferable to have the try and catch followed by the condition: public static int getProcType() { try { procType = getIntInput("Enter procedure type -\n" + " 1 for Exploratory,\n" + " 2 for Reconstructive, \n" + "3 for Follow up: \n"); } catch (NumberFormatException ex) { System.out.println("Error! Enter a valid option!"); getProcType(); } if (procType == 1 || procType == 2 || procType == 3) { hrlyRate = hrlyRate(procType); procedure = procedure(procType); } else { System.out.println("Error! Enter a valid option!"); getProcType(); } return procType; } Or is it better to put the if within the try and catch? public static int getProcType() { try { procType = getIntInput("Enter procedure type -\n" + " 1 for Exploratory,\n" + " 2 for Reconstructive, \n" + "3 for Follow up: \n"); if (procType == 1 || procType == 2 || procType == 3) { hrlyRate = hrlyRate(procType); procedure = procedure(procType); } else { System.out.println("Error! Enter a valid option!"); getProcType(); } } catch (NumberFormatException ex) { System.out.println("Error! Enter a valid option!"); getProcType(); } return procType; } I am thinking the if within the try, may be quicker, but also may be clumsy. Which would be better, as my programming becomes more advanced?

    Read the article

  • Finding the try for an except or finally [migrated]

    - by ?s?
    I'm dealing with some code that has fantastically long methods (10k lines!) and some odd use of try-finally and try-except blocks. Some of the latter are long by themselves, and don't always have the try at the start of the method. Obviously I'm trying to refactor the code, but in the meantime just being able to fix a couple of common pathologies would be much easier if I could jump to the start of a block and see what is happening there. When it's 20+ pages away finding it even with the CNPack rainbows is just tedious. I'm using D2010 and have GExperts (with DelForExp), CNPack and DDevExtensions installed, but I can't find anything that lets me jump from the try to the finally or back. Am I missing something? Is there another add-in that I can use that will get me this?

    Read the article

  • Try/Catch or test parameters

    - by Ondra Morský
    I was recently on a job interview and I was given a task to write simple method in C# to calculate when the trains meet. The code was simple mathematical equation. What I did was that I checked all the parameters on the beginning of the method to make sure, that the code will not fail. My question is: Is it better to check the parameters, or use try/catch? Here are my thoughts: Try/catch is shorter Try/catch will work always even if you forget about some condition Catch is slow in .NET Testing parameters is probably cleaner code (Exceptions should be exceptional) Testing parameters gives you more control over return values I would prefer testing parameters in methods longer than +/- 10 lines, but what do you think about using try/catch in simple methods just like this – i.e. return (a*b)/(c+d); There are many similar questions on stackexchnage, but I am interested in this particular scenario.

    Read the article

  • Should try...catch go inside or outside a loop?

    - by mmyers
    I have a loop that looks something like this: for(int i = 0; i < max; i++) { String myString = ...; float myNum = Float.parseFloat(myString); myFloats[i] = myNum; } This is the main content of a method whose sole purpose is to return the array of floats. I want this method to return null if there is an error, so I put the loop inside a try...catch block, like this: try { for(int i = 0; i < max; i++) { String myString = ...; float myNum = Float.parseFloat(myString); myFloats[i] = myNum; } } catch (NumberFormatException ex) { return null; } But then I also thought of putting the try...catch block inside the loop, like this: for(int i = 0; i < max; i++) { String myString = ...; try { float myNum = Float.parseFloat(myString); } catch (NumberFormatException ex) { return null; } myFloats[i] = myNum; } So my question is: is there any reason, performance or otherwise, to prefer one over the other? EDIT: The consensus seems to be that it is cleaner to put the loop inside the try/catch, possibly inside its own method. However, there is still debate on which is faster. Can someone test this and come back with a unified answer? (EDIT: did it myself, but voted up Jeffrey and Ray's answers)

    Read the article

  • Is your TRY worth catching?

    - by Maria Zakourdaev
      A very useful error handling TRY/CATCH construct is widely used to catch all execution errors  that do not close the database connection. The biggest downside is that in the case of multiple errors the TRY/CATCH mechanism will only catch the last error. An example of this can be seen during a standard restore operation. In this example I attempt to perform a restore from a file that no longer exists. Two errors are being fired: 3201 and 3013: Assuming that we are using the TRY and CATCH construct, the ERROR_MESSAGE() function will catch the last message only: To workaround this problem you can prepare a temporary table that will receive the statement output. Execute the statement inside the xp_cmdshell stored procedure, connect back to the SQL Server using the command line utility sqlcmd and redirect it's output into the previously created temp table.  After receiving the output, you will need to parse it to understand whether the statement has finished successfully or failed. It’s quite easy to accomplish as long as you know which statement was executed. In the case of generic executions you can query the output table and search for words like“Msg%Level%State%” that are usually a part of the error message.Furthermore, you don’t need TRY/CATCH in the above workaround, since the xp_cmdshell procedure always finishes successfully and you can decide whether to fire the RAISERROR statement or not. Yours, Maria

    Read the article

  • PowerShell Try Catch Finally

    - by PointsToShare
    PowerShell Try Catch Finally I am a relative novice to PowerShell and tried (pun intended) to use the “Try Catch Finally” in my scripts. Alas the structure that we love and use in C# (or even – shudder of shudders - in VB) does not always work in PowerShell. It turns out that it works only when the error is a terminating error (whatever that means). Well, you can turn all your errors to the terminating kind by simply setting - $ErrorActionPreference = "Stop", And later resetting it back to “Continue”, which is its normal setting. Now, the lazy approach is to start all your scripts with: $ErrorActionPreference = "Stop" And ending all of them with: $ErrorActionPreference = "Continue" But this opens you to trouble because should your script have an error that you neglected to catch (it even happens to me!), your session will now have all its errors as “terminating”. Obviously this is not a good thing, so instead let’s put these two setups in the beginning of each Try block and in the Finally block as seen below: That’s All Folks!!

    Read the article

  • microsoft windows driver kit pure C try catch syntax ?

    - by clyfe
    In the Windows Driver Kit (WDK) there are some driver code samples written in pure C, but sprinkled with some try-catch-finally constructs. Does someone know their semantics ? Thank you microsoft for your great tools and standards compliance. Code extract from some_file.c: try { ... if (!NT_SUCCESS( status )) { leave; // ??? } ... } finally { ... } try { ... } except( EXCEPTION_EXECUTE_HANDLER ) { ... }

    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

  • why does Visual Studio not enforce try-catch-block implementation?

    - by Pedro
    Coming from Eclipse/Java, I noticed that in VisualStudio/C# it is not mandatory to care about Exceptions. While Eclipse forces the user to implement a try-catch-block or to add a throws declaration, this is not the case in Visual Studio. What is the reason Visual Studio doesn't inform about unhandled exceptions? Can I configure Visual Studio to force me to implement try-catch-blocks, or at least add a compiler-warning?

    Read the article

  • Virtually the fastest way to try Solaris 11 (and Solaris 10 zones)

    - by dminer
    If you're looking to try out Solaris 11, there are the standard ISO and USB image downloads on the main page.  Those are great if you're looking to install Solaris 11 on hardware, and we hope you will.  But if you take the time to look down the page, you'll find a link off to the Oracle Solaris 11 Virtual Machine downloads.  There are two downloads there:A pre-built Solaris 10 zoneA pre-built Solaris 11 VM for use with VirtualBoxIf you're looking to try Solaris 11 on x86, the second one is what you want.  Of course, this assumes you have VirtualBox already (and if you don't, now's the time to try it, it's a terrific free desktop virtualization product).  Once you complete the 1.8 GB download, it's a simple matter of unzipping the archive and a few quick clicks in VirtualBox to get a Solaris 11 desktop booted.  While it's booting, you'll get to run through the new system configuration tool (that'll be the subject of a future posting here) to configure networking, a user account, and so on.So what about that pre-built Solaris 10 zone download?  It's a really simple way to get yourself acquainted with the Solaris 10 zones feature, which you may well find indispensible in transitioning an existing Solaris 10 infrastructure to Solaris 11.  Once you've downloaded the file, it's a self-extracting executable that'll configure the zone for you, all you have to supply is an IP address for the zone.  It's really quite slick!I expect we'll do a lot more pre-built VM's and zones going forward, as that's a big part of being a cloud OS; if there's one that would be really useful for you, let us know.

    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 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >