Search Results

Search found 40287 results on 1612 pages for 'try statement'.

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 21/1612 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • Validating result of JsonConvert.DeserializeObject (think "try parse") using JSON.Net

    - by Riri
    I have incoming messages that I need to try and parse in my own objects structure. SOme of these are well formed JSON obejcts and some are just nonsense. I use JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<MyObject>(incmoingString); to do this. This however sometimes gives me a exception when the incoming is total garbage. Other times I get a non-complete object structure when the incoming string is kind of OK - and finally it sometimes work. I've wrapped the conversion in a try/catch and than manually validate that I've gotten the properties I need to the deserialized result. Is there a better way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Rows dropping when I try to join data from two tables

    - by blcArmadillo
    I have a fairly simple query I'm try to write. If I run the following query: SELECT parts.id, parts.type_id FROM parts WHERE parts.type_id=1 OR parts.type_id=2 OR parts.type_id=4 ORDER BY parts.type_id; I get all the rows I expect to be returned. Now when I try to grab the parent_unit from another table with the following query six rows suddenly drop out of the result: SELECT parts.id, parts.type_id, sp.parent_unit FROM parts, serialized_parts sp WHERE (parts.type_id=1 OR parts.type_id=2 OR parts.type_id=4) AND sp.parts_id = parts.id ORDER BY parts.type_id In the past I've never really dealt with ORs in my queries so maybe I'm just doing it wrong. That said I'm guessing it's just a simple mistake. Let me know if you need sample data and I'll post some. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • get SSL Broken pipe error when try to make push notification

    - by emagic
    We develop an iPhone app, and have push notification for development and ad hoc version working properly. But when we try to send push notification to real user devices in our database, we got SSL connection reset, then Broken pipe error. We think maybe there are too many devices in our database (more than 70000), so it is failed to send all messages at the same time. So we try to send messages to 1000 devices once, but still got this "Broken pipe" error for around 100 messages. And we are not sure whether the messages have been send. Any suggestion?

    Read the article

  • try-catch in JavaScript : how to get stack trace or line number of the original error

    - by Greg Bala
    When using TRY-CATCH in JavaScript, how to get the line number of the line that caused the error? On many browsers, the below code will work great and I will get the stack trace that points to the actual line that throw the exception. However, some browsers do not have "e.stack". Iphone's safari is one example. Is there someway to get the line number that will work for all browsers? try { // lots of code here var i = v.WillGenerateError; // how to get this line number in catch?? // lots of code here } catch (e) { alert (e.stack) // this will not work on iPhone, for example } Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • Confused by this PHP Exception try..catch nesting

    - by Domenic
    Hello. I'm confused by the following code: class MyException extends Exception {} class AnotherException extends MyException {} class Foo { public function something() { print "throwing AnotherException\n"; throw new AnotherException(); } public function somethingElse() { print "throwing MyException\n"; throw new MyException(); } } $a = new Foo(); try { try { $a->something(); } catch(AnotherException $e) { print "caught AnotherException\n"; $a->somethingElse(); } catch(MyException $e) { print "caught MyException\n"; } } catch(Exception $e) { print "caught Exception\n"; } I would expect this to output: throwing AnotherException caught AnotherException throwing MyException caught MyException But instead it outputs: throwing AnotherException caught AnotherException throwing MyException caught Exception Could anyone explain why it "skips over" catch(MyException $e) ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • UIView animation does not animate at first try?

    - by Bacalso Vincent
    Considering that my _palette's frame is like this: _palette.frame = CGRectMake(0,480,320,200); I have this code here to slide up/down a UIView: if(![_pallete superview]) { [self.view addSubview:_pallete]; [self.view insertSubview:_tempViewPaletteListener belowSubview:_pallete]; [UIView animateWithDuration:0.3 animations:^{ _pallete.top -= kPaletteHeight; } completion:^(BOOL isFinished) { }]; } else { [UIView animateWithDuration:0.3 animations:^{ _pallete.top += kPaletteHeight; } completion:^(BOOL isFinished) { [_tempViewPaletteListener removeFromSuperview]; [_pallete removeFromSuperview]; }]; } *the _tempViewPaletteListener is just a view with a tap gesture use to dismiss the palette* The problem is when I first try to run code here, the _palette view will just stiffly display right away. What I expected is, it should slide up the _palette view. Though it works fine after the first try

    Read the article

  • Avoiding try/catch hell in my web pages

    - by Shaun_web
    I am writing an ASP.NET website, which is a new framework for me. I find that I have a try/catch block in literally every method of my codebehind. All these try/catch blocks do is catch the exception and then pop-up an error message to the user. Isn't there some sort of global error handler in ASP.NET? It's worth noting that my error handling is within control (ASCX) pages, and I would like a way to simply get each ASCX to handle its own errors without forcing all error handling just to a single master page or a redirect...

    Read the article

  • Using a message class static method taking in an action to wrap Try/Catch

    - by Chris Marisic
    I have a Result object that lets me pass around a List of event messages and I can check whether an action was successful or not. I've realized I've written this code in alot of places Result result; try { //Do Something ... //New result is automatically a success for not having any errors in it result = new Result(); } catch (Exception exception) { //Extension method that returns a Result from the exception result = exception.ToResult(); } if(result.Success) .... What I'm considering is replacing this usage with public static Result CatchException(Action action) { try { action(); return new Result(); } catch (Exception exception) { return exception.ToResult(); } } And then use it like var result = Result.CatchException(() => _model.Save(something)); Does anyone feel there's anything wrong with this or that I'm trading reusability for obscurity?

    Read the article

  • Using try vs if in python

    - by artdanil
    Is there a rationale to decide which one of try or if constructs to use, when testing variable to have a value? For example, there is a function that returns either a list or doesn't return a value. I want to check result before processing it. Which of the following would be more preferable and why? result = function(); if (result): for r in result: #process items or result = function(); try: for r in result: #process items except TypeError: pass; Related discussion: Checking for member existence in Python

    Read the article

  • Does 'throw' or 'try...catch' hinder performance?

    - by Richard
    I've been reading all over the place (including here) about when exception should / shouldn't be used. I now want to change my code that would throw to make the method return false and handle it like that, but my question is: Is it the throwing or try..catch-ing that can hinder performance...? What I mean is, would this be acceptable: bool method someMmethod() { try { // ...Do something catch (Exception ex) // Don't care too much what at the moment... { // Output error // Return false } return true // No errors Or would there be a better way to do it? (I'm bloody sick of seeing "Unhandled exception..." LOL!)

    Read the article

  • try finally block around every Object.Create?

    - by max
    Hi, I have a general question about best practice in OO Delphi. Currently, I but a try finally block around everywhere, where I create an object, to free that object after usage (to avoid memory leaks). E.g.: aObject := TObject.Create; try aOBject.AProcedure(); ... finally aObject.Free; end; instead of: aObject := TObject.Create; aObject.AProcedure(); .. aObject.Free; To you think, it is good practice, or too much overhead? And what about the performance?

    Read the article

  • Delphi Exception handling problem with multiple Exception handling blocks

    - by Robert Oschler
    I'm using Delphi Pro 6 on Windows XP with FastMM 4.92 and the JEDI JVCL 3.0. Given the code below, I'm having the following problem: only the first exception handling block gets a valid instance of E. The other blocks match properly with the class of the Exception being raised, but E is unassigned (nil). For example, given the current order of the exception handling blocks when I raise an E1 the block for E1 matches and E is a valid object instance. However, if I try to raise an E2, that block does match, but E is unassigned (nil). If I move the E2 catching block to the top of the ordering and raise an E1, then when the E1 block matches E is is now unassigned. With this new ordering if I raise an E2, E is properly assigned when it wasn't when the E2 block was not the first block in the ordering. Note I tried this case with a bare-bones project consisting of just a single Delphi form. Am I doing something really silly here or is something really wrong? Thanks, Robert type E1 = class(EAbort) end; E2 = class(EAbort) end; procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject); begin try raise E1.Create('hello'); except On E: E1 do begin OutputDebugString('E1'); end; On E: E2 do begin OutputDebugString('E2'); end; On E: Exception do begin OutputDebugString('E(all)'); end; end; // try() end;

    Read the article

  • Delph Exception handling problem with multiple Exception handling blocks

    - by Robert Oschler
    I'm using Delphi Pro 6 on Windows XP with FastMM 4.92 and the JEDI JVCL 3.0. Given the code below, I'm having the following problem: only the first exception handling block gets a valid instance of E. The other blocks match properly with the class of the Exception being raised, but E is unassigned (nil). For example, given the current order of the exception handling blocks when I raise an E1 the block for E1 matches and E is a valid object instance. However, if I try to raise an E2, that block does match, but E is unassigned (nil). If I move the E2 catching block to the top of the ordering and raise an E1, then when the E1 block matches E is is now unassigned. With this new ordering if I raise an E2, E is properly assigned when it wasn't when the E2 block was not the first block in the ordering. Note I tried this case with a bare-bones project consisting of just a single Delphi form. Am I doing something really silly here or is something really wrong? Thanks, Robert type E1 = class(EAbort) end; E2 = class(EAbort) end; procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject); begin try raise E1.Create('hello'); except On E: E1 do begin OutputDebugString('E1'); end; On E: E2 do begin OutputDebugString('E2'); end; On E: Exception do begin OutputDebugString('E(all)'); end; end; // try() end;

    Read the article

  • try/catch: errors or exceptions?

    - by Josh
    OK. I may be splitting hairs here, but my code isn't consistent and I'd like to make it so. But before I do, I want to make sure I'm going the right way. In practice this doesn't matter, but this has been bothering me for a while so I figured I'd ask my peers... Every time I use a try... catch statement, in the catch block I always log a message to my internal console. However my log messages are not consistent. They either look like: catch(err) { DFTools.console.log("someMethod caught an error: ",err.message); ... or: catch(ex) { DFTools.console.log("someMethod caught an exception: ",ex.message); ... Obviously the code functions properly either way but it's starting to bother me that I sometimes refer to "errors" and sometimes to "exceptions". Like I said, maybe I'm splitting hairs but which is the proper terminology? "Exception", or "Error"?

    Read the article

  • JavaScript try/catch: errors or exceptions?

    - by Josh
    OK. I may be splitting hairs here, but my code isn't consistent and I'd like to make it so. But before I do, I want to make sure I'm going the right way. In practice this doesn't matter, but this has been bothering me for a while so I figured I'd ask my peers... Every time I use a try... catch statement, in the catch block I always log a message to my internal console. However my log messages are not consistent. They either look like: catch(err) { DFTools.console.log("someMethod caught an error: ",err.message); ... or: catch(ex) { DFTools.console.log("someMethod caught an exception: ",ex.message); ... Obviously the code functions properly either way but it's starting to bother me that I sometimes refer to "errors" and sometimes to "exceptions". Like I said, maybe I'm splitting hairs but which is the proper terminology? "Exception", or "Error"?

    Read the article

  • PHP PDO Related: Update SQL Statement not Updating the content of Database

    - by Rachel
    I am trying to implement update statement using prepared statement in php script but it appears that it is not update record in the database and am not sure why and so would appreciate if you can share some insights. Code $query = "UPDATE DatTable SET DF_PARTY_ID = :party_id, DF_PARTY_CODE = :party_code, DF_CONNECTION_ID = :connection_id WHERE DF_PARTY_ID = ':party_id'"; $stmt = $this->connection->prepare($query); $stmt->bindValue(':party_id', $data[0], PDO::PARAM_INT); $stmt->bindValue(':party_code', $data[1], PDO::PARAM_INT); $stmt->bindValue(':connection_id', $data[2], PDO::PARAM_INT); $stmt->execute(); Inspiring Solution leading to this approach. Any Suggestions ?

    Read the article

  • SQL server recursive query error.The maximum recursion 100 has been exhausted before statement completion

    - by ienax_ridens
    I have a recursive query that returns an error when I run it; in other databases (with more data) I have not the problem. In my case this query returns 2 colums (ID_PARENT and ID_CHILD) doing a recursion because my tree can have more than one level, bit I wanna have only "direct" parent. NOTE: I tried to put OPTION (MAXRECURSION 0) at the end of the query, but with no luck. The following query is only a part of the entire query, I tried to put OPTION only at the end of the "big query" having a continous running query, but no errors displayed. Error have in SQL Server: "The statement terminated.The maximum recursion 100 has been exhausted before statement completion" The query is the following: WITH q AS (SELECT ID_ITEM, ID_ITEM AS ID_ITEM_ANCESTOR FROM ITEMS_TABLE i JOIN ITEMS_TYPES_TABLE itt ON itt.ID_ITEM_TYPE = i.ID_ITEM_TYPE UNION ALL SELECT i.ID_ITEM, q.ID_ITEM_ANCESTOR FROM q JOIN ITEMS_TABLE i ON i.ID_ITEM_PADRE = q.ID_ITEM JOIN ITEMS_TYPES_TABLE itt ON itt.ID_ITEM_TYPE = i.ID_ITEM_TYPE) SELECT ID_ITEM AS ID_CHILD, ID_ITEM_ANCESTOR AS ID_PARENT FROM q I need a suggestion to re-write this query to avoid the error of recursion and see the data, that are few.

    Read the article

  • Can a DevExpress XtraGrid be filled using a a Dynamic SELECT statement string

    - by Gerhard Weiss
    Can a DevExpress XtraGrid be filled using a a Dynamic SELECT statement string? i.e. SELECT * FROM Employee or SELECT * FROM Dependents To fill our XtraGrids currently, we use a ORM that creates entities. To do this it takes a lot of steps and time. What is driving me to ask this question is we do a lot of client aquistions where we get hundreds of files. I do not want to create entities for all of these then have to create an XtraGrid for each entity. Ideally if I can just feed it a SELECT statement and the XtraGrid could render it then I could use the XtraGrid very nice data minipulation features (Filter, Group By, etc). If you have any other ideas or suggestions please to not hesitate to post them.

    Read the article

  • Lock statement vs Monitor.Enter method.

    - by Vokinneberg
    I suppose it is an interesting code example. We have a class, let's call it Test with Finalize method. In Main method here is two code blocks where i am using lock statement and Monitor.Enter call. Also i have two instances of class Test here. The experiment is pretty simple - nulling Test variable within locking block and try to collect it manually with GC.Collect method call. So, to see the Finilaze call i am calling GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers method. Everything is very simple as you can see. By defenition of lock statement it's opens by compiler to try{...}finally{..} block with Minitor.Enter call inside of try block and Monitor.Exit in finally block. I've tryed to implement try-finally block manually. I've expected the same behaviour in both cases. in case of using lock and in case of unsing Monitor.Enter. But, surprize, surprize - it is different as you can see below. public class Test : IDisposable { private string name; public Test(string name) { this.name = name; } ~Test() { Console.WriteLine(string.Format("Finalizing class name {0}.", name)); } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var test1 = new Test("Test1"); var test2 = new Test("Tesst2"); lock (test1) { test1 = null; Console.WriteLine("Manual collect 1."); GC.Collect(); GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers(); Console.WriteLine("Manual collect 2."); GC.Collect(); } var lockTaken = false; System.Threading.Monitor.Enter(test2, ref lockTaken); try { test2 = null; Console.WriteLine("Manual collect 3."); GC.Collect(); GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers(); Console.WriteLine("Manual collect 4."); GC.Collect(); } finally { System.Threading.Monitor.Exit(test2); } Console.ReadLine(); } } Output of this example is Manual collect 1. Manual collect 2. Manual collect 3. Finalizing class name Test2. Manual collect 4. And null reference exception in last finally block because test2 is null reference. I've was surprised and disasembly my code into IL. So, here is IL dump of Main method. .entrypoint .maxstack 2 .locals init ( [0] class ConsoleApplication2.Test test1, [1] class ConsoleApplication2.Test test2, [2] bool lockTaken, [3] bool <>s__LockTaken0, [4] class ConsoleApplication2.Test CS$2$0000, [5] bool CS$4$0001) L_0000: nop L_0001: ldstr "Test1" L_0006: newobj instance void ConsoleApplication2.Test::.ctor(string) L_000b: stloc.0 L_000c: ldstr "Tesst2" L_0011: newobj instance void ConsoleApplication2.Test::.ctor(string) L_0016: stloc.1 L_0017: ldc.i4.0 L_0018: stloc.3 L_0019: ldloc.0 L_001a: dup L_001b: stloc.s CS$2$0000 L_001d: ldloca.s <>s__LockTaken0 L_001f: call void [mscorlib]System.Threading.Monitor::Enter(object, bool&) L_0024: nop L_0025: nop L_0026: ldnull L_0027: stloc.0 L_0028: ldstr "Manual collect." L_002d: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) L_0032: nop L_0033: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::Collect() L_0038: nop L_0039: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::WaitForPendingFinalizers() L_003e: nop L_003f: ldstr "Manual collect." L_0044: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) L_0049: nop L_004a: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::Collect() L_004f: nop L_0050: nop L_0051: leave.s L_0066 L_0053: ldloc.3 L_0054: ldc.i4.0 L_0055: ceq L_0057: stloc.s CS$4$0001 L_0059: ldloc.s CS$4$0001 L_005b: brtrue.s L_0065 L_005d: ldloc.s CS$2$0000 L_005f: call void [mscorlib]System.Threading.Monitor::Exit(object) L_0064: nop L_0065: endfinally L_0066: nop L_0067: ldc.i4.0 L_0068: stloc.2 L_0069: ldloc.1 L_006a: ldloca.s lockTaken L_006c: call void [mscorlib]System.Threading.Monitor::Enter(object, bool&) L_0071: nop L_0072: nop L_0073: ldnull L_0074: stloc.1 L_0075: ldstr "Manual collect." L_007a: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) L_007f: nop L_0080: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::Collect() L_0085: nop L_0086: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::WaitForPendingFinalizers() L_008b: nop L_008c: ldstr "Manual collect." L_0091: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) L_0096: nop L_0097: call void [mscorlib]System.GC::Collect() L_009c: nop L_009d: nop L_009e: leave.s L_00aa L_00a0: nop L_00a1: ldloc.1 L_00a2: call void [mscorlib]System.Threading.Monitor::Exit(object) L_00a7: nop L_00a8: nop L_00a9: endfinally L_00aa: nop L_00ab: call string [mscorlib]System.Console::ReadLine() L_00b0: pop L_00b1: ret .try L_0019 to L_0053 finally handler L_0053 to L_0066 .try L_0072 to L_00a0 finally handler L_00a0 to L_00aa I does not see any difference between lock statement and Monitor.Enter call. So, why i steel have a reference to the instance of test1 in case of lock, and object is not collected by GC, but in case of using Monitor.Enter it is collected and finilized?

    Read the article

  • MS Access 2003 - VBA for altering a table after a "SELECT * INTO tblTemp FROM tblMain" statement

    - by Justin
    Hi. I use functions like the following to make temporary tables out of crosstabs queries. Function SQL_Tester() Dim sql As String If DCount("*", "MSysObjects", "[Name]='tblTemp'") Then DoCmd.DeleteObject acTable, "tblTemp" End If sql = "SELECT * INTO tblTemp from TblMain;" Debug.Print (sql) Set db = CurrentDb db.Execute (sql) End Function I do this so that I can then use more vba to take the temporary table to excel, use some of excel functionality (formulas and such) and then return the values to the original table (tblMain). Simple spot i am getting tripped up is that after the Select INTO statement I need to add a brand new additional column to that temporary table and I do not know how to do this: sql = "Create Table..." is like the only way i know how to do this and of course this doesn't work to well with the above approach because I can't create a table that has already been created after the fact, and I cannot create it before because the SELECT INTO statement approach will return a "table already exists" message. Any help? thanks guys!

    Read the article

  • Wrong line number on stack trace

    - by Claudio Redi
    Hi! I have this code try { //AN EXCEPTION IS GENERATED HERE!!! } catch { SqlService.RollbackTransaction(); throw; } Code above is called in this code try { //HERE IS CALLED THE METHOD THAT CONTAINS THE CODE ABOVE } catch (Exception ex) { HandleException(ex); } The exception passed as parameter to the method "HandleException" contains the line number of the "throw" line in the stack trace instead of the real line where the exception was generated. Anyone knows why this could be happening?

    Read the article

  • unexpected T_TRY, expecting T_FUNCTION error message, not sure why ?

    - by Rachel
    I am getting unexpected T_TRY, expecting T_FUNCTION error message and am not sure as too why am getting that, can't we use try and catch block inside class like this: class Processor { protected $dao; protected $fin; try { public function __construct($file) { //Open File for parsing. $this->fin = fopen($file,'w+') or die('Cannot open file'); // Initialize the Repository DAO. $this->dao = new Dao('some name'); } public function initiateInserts() { while (($data=fgetcsv($this->fin,5000,";"))!==FALSE) { $initiate_inserts = $this->dao->initiateInserts($data); } } public function initiateCUpdates() { while (($data=fgetcsv($this->fin,5000,";"))!==FALSE) { $initiate_updates = $this->dao->initiateCUpdates($data); } } public function initiateExecuteIUpdates() { while (($data=fgetcsv($this->fin,5000,";"))!==FALSE) { $initiate_updates = $this->dao->initiateIUpdates($data); } } } catch (Exception $e) { } }

    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 | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >