Search Results

Search found 16643 results on 666 pages for 'exception handling'.

Page 4/666 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Subterranean IL: Exception handling 1

  - by Simon Cooper

  Today, I'll be starting a look at the Structured Exception Handling mechanism within the CLR. Exception handling is quite a complicated business, and, as a result, the rules governing exception handling clauses in IL are quite strict; you need to be careful when writing exception clauses in IL. Exception handlers Exception handlers are specified using a .try clause within a method definition. .try <TryStartLabel> to <TryEndLabel> <HandlerType> handler <HandlerStartLabel> to <HandlerEndLabel> As an example, a basic try/catch block would be specified like so: TryBlockStart: // ... leave.s CatchBlockEndTryBlockEnd:CatchBlockStart: // at the start of a catch block, the exception thrown is on the stack callvirt instance string [mscorlib]System.Object::ToString() call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) leave.s CatchBlockEnd CatchBlockEnd: // method code continues... .try TryBlockStart to TryBlockEnd catch [mscorlib]System.Exception handler CatchBlockStart to CatchBlockEnd There are four different types of handler that can be specified: catch <TypeToken> This is the standard exception catch clause; you specify the object type that you want to catch (for example, [mscorlib]System.ArgumentException). Any object can be thrown as an exception, although Microsoft recommend that only classes derived from System.Exception are thrown as exceptions. filter <FilterLabel> A filter block allows you to provide custom logic to determine if a handler block should be run. This functionality is exposed in VB, but not in C#. finally A finally block executes when the try block exits, regardless of whether an exception was thrown or not. fault This is similar to a finally block, but a fault block executes only if an exception was thrown. This is not exposed in VB or C#. You can specify multiple catch or filter handling blocks in each .try, but fault and finally handlers must have their own .try clause. We'll look into why this is in later posts. Scoped exception handlers The .try syntax is quite tricky to use; it requires multiple labels, and you've got to be careful to keep separate the different exception handling sections. However, starting from .NET 2, IL allows you to use scope blocks to specify exception handlers instead. Using this syntax, the example above can be written like so: .try { // ... leave.s EndSEH}catch [mscorlib]System.Exception { callvirt instance string [mscorlib]System.Object::ToString() call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) leave.s EndSEH}EndSEH:// method code continues... As you can see, this is much easier to write (and read!) than a stand-alone .try clause. Next time, I'll be looking at some of the restrictions imposed by SEH on control flow, and how the C# compiler generated exception handling clauses.

  Read the article

• Good practice or service for monitoring unhandled application errors for a small organization

  - by palto

  I'm working with multiple software with varying ways of monitoring for errors. When I make software, I usually send email with the stack trace to admins(usually me). Some customer software is monitored by a team who check that a particular batch run was successfull. Other software might not have any monitoring at all(someone will call when things go wrong horribly). Sending emails is good, except when things start going wrong, my mail gets filled fast. Also I don't want to solve the same problem in code for every software. Is there some relatively cheap and low maintenance software or practice to handle this. I want it to be cheap/low maintenance because usually I work alone or in teams of 5 or smaller. For example it would be great if errors would be aggregated so I don't get 10 000 emails when something unexpected happens... For clarification: By unhandled errors I mean Exceptions that were unhandled by application code that were propagated to Tomcat or Jboss. I don't need help with how to catch those errors. I need help with what to do with them. Is there any cloud application that I could send my errors to? Or some simple server to install? Or some library that can handle errors using configuration files. I use Java if that is any help.

  Read the article

• What is the difference between C++, Java and JavaScript exception handling?

  - by Dpp

  They are very different kind of languages and the way they handle exception might be pretty different.. How is exception handling implemented and what are the implementation difference within these languages? I am asking this question also because I noticed that C++ exception handling seems to be very slow compared to the JavaScript version.

  Read the article

• Why NullPointerException is a runtime exception and RemoteException not?

  - by Tom Brito

  A possible reason because a NullPointerException is a runtime exception is because every method can throw it, so every method would need to have a "throws NullPointerException", and would be ugly. But this happens with RemoteException. And a possible reason because RemoteException is not a runtime exception, is to tell it client to treat the exception. But every method in a remote environment need throws it, so there is no difference of throwing NullPointerException. Speculations? Was I clear?

  Read the article

• Error Handling Examples(C#)

  “The purpose of reviewing the Error Handling code is to assure that the application fails safely under all possible error conditions, expected and unexpected. No sensitive information is presented to the user when an error occurs.” (OWASP, 2011) No Error Handling The absence of error handling is still a form of error handling. Based on the code in Figure 1, if an error occurred and was not handled within either the ReadXml or BuildRequest methods the error would bubble up to the Search method. Since this method does not handle any acceptations the error will then bubble up the stack trace. If this continues and the error is not handled within the application then the environment in which the application is running will notify the user running the application that an error occurred based on what type of application. Figure 1: No Error Handling public DataSet Search(string searchTerm, int resultCount) { DataSet dt = new DataSet(); dt.ReadXml(BuildRequest(searchTerm, resultCount)); return dt; } Generic Error Handling One simple way to add error handling is to catch all errors by default. If you examine the code in Figure 2, you will see a try-catch block. On April 6th 2010 Louis Lazaris clearly describes a Try Catch statement by defining both the Try and Catch aspects of the statement. “The try portion is where you would put any code that might throw an error. In other words, all significant code should go in the try section. The catch section will also hold code, but that section is not vital to the running of the application. So, if you removed the try-catch statement altogether, the section of code inside the try part would still be the same, but all the code inside the catch would be removed.” (Lazaris, 2010) He also states that all errors that occur in the try section cause it to stops the execution of the try section and redirects all execution to the catch section. The catch section receives an object containing information about the error that occurred so that they system can gracefully handle the error properly. When errors occur they commonly log them in some form. This form could be an email, database entry, web service call, log file, or just an error massage displayed to the user.  Depending on the error sometimes applications can recover, while others force an application to close. Figure 2: Generic Error Handling public DataSet Search(string searchTerm, int resultCount) { DataSet dt = new DataSet(); try { dt.ReadXml(BuildRequest(searchTerm, resultCount)); } catch (Exception ex) { // Handle all Exceptions } return dt; } Error Specific Error Handling Like the Generic Error Handling, Error Specific error handling allows for the catching of specific known errors that may occur. For example wrapping a try catch statement around a soap web service call would allow the application to handle any error that was generated by the soap web service. Now, if the systems wanted to send a message to the web service provider every time a soap error occurred but did not want to notify them if any other type of error occurred like a network time out issue. This would be varying tedious to accomplish using the General Error Handling methodology. This brings us to the use case for using the Error Specific error handling methodology.  The Error Specific Error handling methodology allows for the TryCatch statement to catch various types of errors depending on the type of error that occurred. In Figure 3, the code attempts to handle DataException differently compared to how it potentially handles all other errors. This allows for specific error handling for each type of known error, and still allows for error handling of any unknown error that my occur during the execution of the TryCatch statement. Figure 5: Error Specific Error Handling public DataSet Search(string searchTerm, int resultCount) { DataSet dt = new DataSet(); try { dt.ReadXml(BuildRequest(searchTerm, resultCount)); } catch (TimeoutException ex) { // Handle Timeout TimeoutException Only } catch (Exception) { // Handle all Exceptions } return dt; }

  Read the article

• What to Return? Error String, Bool with Error String Out, or Void with Exception

  - by Ranger Pretzel

  I spend most of my time in C# and am trying to figure out which is the best practice for handling an exception and cleanly return an error message from a called method back to the calling method. For example, here is some ActiveDirectory authentication code. Please imagine this Method as part of a Class (and not just a standalone function.) bool IsUserAuthenticated(string domain, string user, string pass, out errStr) { bool authentic = false; try { // Instantiate Directory Entry object DirectoryEntry entry = new DirectoryEntry("LDAP://" + domain, user, pass); // Force connection over network to authenticate object nativeObject = entry.NativeObject; // No exception thrown? We must be good, then. authentic = true; } catch (Exception e) { errStr = e.Message().ToString(); } return authentic; } The advantages of doing it this way are a clear YES or NO that you can embed right in your If-Then-Else statement. The downside is that it also requires the person using the method to supply a string to get the Error back (if any.) I guess I could overload this method with the same parameters minus the "out errStr", but ignoring the error seems like a bad idea since there can be many reasons for such a failure... Alternatively, I could write a method that returns an Error String (instead of using "out errStr") in which a returned empty string means that the user authenticated fine. string AuthenticateUser(string domain, string user, string pass) { string errStr = ""; try { // Instantiate Directory Entry object DirectoryEntry entry = new DirectoryEntry("LDAP://" + domain, user, pass); // Force connection over network to authenticate object nativeObject = entry.NativeObject; } catch (Exception e) { errStr = e.Message().ToString(); } return errStr; } But this seems like a "weak" way of doing things. Or should I just make my method "void" and just not handle the exception so that it gets passed back to the calling function? void AuthenticateUser(string domain, string user, string pass) { // Instantiate Directory Entry object DirectoryEntry entry = new DirectoryEntry("LDAP://" + domain, user, pass); // Force connection over network to authenticate object nativeObject = entry.NativeObject; } This seems the most sane to me (for some reason). Yet at the same time, the only real advantage of wrapping those 2 lines over just typing those 2 lines everywhere I need to authenticate is that I don't need to include the "LDAP://" string. The downside with this way of doing it is that the user has to put this method in a try-catch block. Thoughts? Is there another way of doing this that I'm not thinking of?

  Read the article

• Programming Concepts: What should be done when an exception is thrown?

  - by Dooms101

  This does not really apply to any language specifically, but if it matters I am using VB.NET in Visual Studio 2008. I can't seem to find anything really that useful using Google about this topic, but I was wondering what is common practice when an exception is thrown and caught but since it has been thrown the application cannot continue operating. For example I have exceptions that are thrown by my FileLoader class when a file cannot be found or when a file is deemed corrupt. The exception is only thrown within the class and is not handled really. If the error is detected, then the exception is thrown and whatever function is was thrown is basically quits. So in the code trying to create that object or call one of its members I use a Try...Catch statement. However, I was wondering, what should even do when this exception is caught? My application needs these files to be intact, and if they are not, the application is almost useless. So far I just pop up a message box telling the user their is an error and to reinstall. What else can I do, or better, what's common practice in these situations?

  Read the article

• How can I set up .NET UnhandledException handling in a Windows service?

  - by Mike Pateras

  protected override void OnStart(string[] args) { AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException += new UnhandledExceptionEventHandler(CurrentDomain_UnhandledException); Thread.Sleep(10000); throw new Exception(); } void CurrentDomain_UnhandledException(object sender, UnhandledExceptionEventArgs e) { } I attached a debugger to the above code in my windows service, setting a breakpoint in CurrentDomain_UnhandledException, but it was never hit. The exception pops up saying that it is unhandled, and then the service stops. I even tried putting some code in the event handler, in case it was getting optimized away. Is this not the proper way to set up unhandled exception handling in a windows service?

  Read the article

• How can I set up .Net unhanlded exception handling in a windows service?

  - by Mike Pateras

  protected override void OnStart(string[] args) { AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException += new UnhandledExceptionEventHandler(CurrentDomain_UnhandledException); Thread.Sleep(10000); throw new Exception(); } void CurrentDomain_UnhandledException(object sender, UnhandledExceptionEventArgs e) { } I attached a debugger to the above code in my windows service, setting a breakpoint in CurrentDomain_UnhandledException, but it was never hit. The exception pops up saying that it is unhandled, and then the service stops. I even tried putting some code in the event handler, in case it was getting optimized away. Is this not the proper way to set up unhandled exception handling in a windows service?

  Read the article

• Catch not working and how to unset the exception handler

  - by neoneye

  catch is not working because there is installed an exception handler using set_exception_handler() I need "catch" to work, so I guess I need to unset the exception handler somehow. Things such as set_exception_handler(NULL) isn't working. Any ideas how to unset the exception handler? function my_exception_handler($exception) { error_log("caught exception: " . $exception->getMessage() ); } set_exception_handler("my_exception_handler"); // QUESTION: how does on unset it ? //set_exception_handler(NULL); try { throw new Exception('hello world'); error_log("should not happen"); } catch(Exception $e) { error_log("should happen: " . $e->getMessage()); } Actual output: caught exception: hello world Desired output: should happen: hello world

  Read the article

• In a client-server relationship, should the server always rethrow the exception to the client?

  - by dotnetdev

  I have a set of web services (the server), and an app which consumes this (client). In this sort of relationship, should the server always throw exceptions (ie in the throw block, rethrow the caught exception), and the client catch this. Exceptions which the server can handle, it will deal with and not rethrow, but everything else will be thrown to the calling layer for further action (the consuming app can raise a msg box or whatever). Is this a good example of an exception that can be dealt with: A file cannot be written because the directory requires special privileges, so if this raises an exception, the file is written somewhere which does not require admin rights. Thanks

  Read the article

• Exception Handling Differences Between 32/64 Bit

  - by Alois Kraus

  I do quite a bit of debugging .NET applications but from time to time I see things that are impossible (at a first look). I may ask you dear reader what your mental exception handling model is. Exception handling is easy after all right? Lets suppose the following code:         private void F1(object sender, EventArgs e)         {             try             {                 F2();             }             catch (Exception ex)             {                 throw new Exception("even worse Exception");             }           }           private void F2()         {             try             {                 F3();             }             finally             {                 throw new Exception("other exception");             }         }           private void F3()         {             throw new NotImplementedException();         }   What will the call stack look like when you break into the catch(Exception) clause in Windbg (32 and 64 bit on .NET 3.5 SP1)? The mental model I have is that when an exception is thrown the stack frames are unwound until the catch handler can execute. An exception does propagate the call chain upwards.   So when F3 does throw an exception the control flow will resume at the finally handler in F2 which does throw another exception hiding the original one (that is nasty) and then the new Exception will be catched in F1 where the catch handler is executed. So we should see in the catch handler in F1 as call stack only the F1 stack frame right? Well lets try it out in Windbg. For this I created a simple Windows Forms application with one button which does execute the F1 method in its click handler. When you compile the application for 64 bit and the catch handler is reached you will find with the following commands in Windbg   Load sos extension from the same path where mscorwks was loaded in the current process .loadby sos mscorwks   Beak on clr exceptions sxe clr   Continue execution g   Dump mixed call stack container C++  and .NET Stacks interleaved 0:000> !DumpStack OS Thread Id: 0x1d8 (0) Child-SP         RetAddr          Call Site 00000000002c88c0 000007fefa68f0bd KERNELBASE!RaiseException+0x39 00000000002c8990 000007fefac42ed0 mscorwks!RaiseTheExceptionInternalOnly+0x295 00000000002c8a60 000007ff005dd7f4 mscorwks!JIT_Throw+0x130 00000000002c8c10 000007fefa6942e1 WindowsFormsApplication1!WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1.F1(System.Object, System.EventArgs)+0xb4 00000000002c8c60 000007fefa661012 mscorwks!ExceptionTracker::CallHandler+0x145 00000000002c8d60 000007fefa711a72 mscorwks!ExceptionTracker::CallCatchHandler+0x9e 00000000002c8df0 0000000077b055cd mscorwks!ProcessCLRException+0x25e 00000000002c8e90 0000000077ae55f8 ntdll!RtlpExecuteHandlerForUnwind+0xd 00000000002c8ec0 000007fefa637c1a ntdll!RtlUnwindEx+0x539 00000000002c9560 000007fefa711a21 mscorwks!ClrUnwindEx+0x36 00000000002c9a70 0000000077b0554d mscorwks!ProcessCLRException+0x20d 00000000002c9b10 0000000077ae5d1c ntdll!RtlpExecuteHandlerForException+0xd 00000000002c9b40 0000000077b1fe48 ntdll!RtlDispatchException+0x3cb 00000000002ca220 000007fefdaeaa7d ntdll!KiUserExceptionDispatcher+0x2e 00000000002ca7e0 000007fefa68f0bd KERNELBASE!RaiseException+0x39 00000000002ca8b0 000007fefac42ed0 mscorwks!RaiseTheExceptionInternalOnly+0x295 00000000002ca980 000007ff005dd8df mscorwks!JIT_Throw+0x130 00000000002cab30 000007fefa6942e1 WindowsFormsApplication1!WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1.F2()+0x9f 00000000002cab80 000007fefa71b5b3 mscorwks!ExceptionTracker::CallHandler+0x145 00000000002cac80 000007fefa70dcd0 mscorwks!ExceptionTracker::ProcessManagedCallFrame+0x683 00000000002caed0 000007fefa7119af mscorwks!ExceptionTracker::ProcessOSExceptionNotification+0x430 00000000002cbd90 0000000077b055cd mscorwks!ProcessCLRException+0x19b 00000000002cbe30 0000000077ae55f8 ntdll!RtlpExecuteHandlerForUnwind+0xd 00000000002cbe60 000007fefa637c1a ntdll!RtlUnwindEx+0x539 00000000002cc500 000007fefa711a21 mscorwks!ClrUnwindEx+0x36 00000000002cca10 0000000077b0554d mscorwks!ProcessCLRException+0x20d 00000000002ccab0 0000000077ae5d1c ntdll!RtlpExecuteHandlerForException+0xd 00000000002ccae0 0000000077b1fe48 ntdll!RtlDispatchException+0x3cb 00000000002cd1c0 000007fefdaeaa7d ntdll!KiUserExceptionDispatcher+0x2e 00000000002cd780 000007fefa68f0bd KERNELBASE!RaiseException+0x39 00000000002cd850 000007fefac42ed0 mscorwks!RaiseTheExceptionInternalOnly+0x295 00000000002cd920 000007ff005dd968 mscorwks!JIT_Throw+0x130 00000000002cdad0 000007ff005dd875 WindowsFormsApplication1!WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1.F3()+0x48 00000000002cdb10 000007ff005dd786 WindowsFormsApplication1!WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1.F2()+0x35 00000000002cdb60 000007ff005dbe6a WindowsFormsApplication1!WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1.F1(System.Object, System.EventArgs)+0x46 00000000002cdbc0 000007ff005dd452 System_Windows_Forms!System.Windows.Forms.Control.OnClick(System.EventArgs)+0x5a   Hm okaaay. I see my method F1 two times in this call stack. Looks like we did get some recursion bug. But that can´t be given the obvious code above. Let´s try the same thing in a 32 bit process.  0:000> !DumpStack OS Thread Id: 0x33e4 (0) Current frame: KERNELBASE!RaiseException+0x58 ChildEBP RetAddr  Caller,Callee 0028ed38 767db727 KERNELBASE!RaiseException+0x58, calling ntdll!RtlRaiseException 0028ed4c 68b9008c mscorwks!Binder::RawGetClass+0x20, calling mscorwks!Module::LookupTypeDef 0028ed5c 68b904ff mscorwks!Binder::IsClass+0x23, calling mscorwks!Binder::RawGetClass 0028ed68 68bfb96f mscorwks!Binder::IsException+0x14, calling mscorwks!Binder::IsClass 0028ed78 68bfb996 mscorwks!IsExceptionOfType+0x23, calling mscorwks!Binder::IsException 0028ed80 68bfbb1c mscorwks!RaiseTheExceptionInternalOnly+0x2a8, calling KERNEL32!RaiseExceptionStub 0028eda8 68ba0713 mscorwks!Module::ResolveStringRef+0xe0, calling mscorwks!BaseDomain::GetStringObjRefPtrFromUnicodeString 0028edc8 68b91e8d mscorwks!SetObjectReferenceUnchecked+0x19 0028ede0 68c8e910 mscorwks!JIT_Throw+0xfc, calling mscorwks!RaiseTheExceptionInternalOnly 0028ee44 68c8e734 mscorwks!JIT_StrCns+0x22, calling mscorwks!LazyMachStateCaptureState 0028ee54 68c8e865 mscorwks!JIT_Throw+0x1e, calling mscorwks!LazyMachStateCaptureState 0028eea4 02ffaecd (MethodDesc 0x7af08c +0x7d WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1.F1(System.Object, System.EventArgs)), calling mscorwks!JIT_Throw 0028eeec 02ffaf19 (MethodDesc 0x7af098 +0x29 WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1.F2()), calling 06370634 0028ef58 02ffae37 (MethodDesc 0x7a7bb0 +0x4f System.Windows.Forms.Control.OnClick(System.EventArgs))   That does look more familar. The call stack has been unwound and we do see only some frames into the history where the debugger was smart enough to find out that we have called F2 from F1. The exception handling on 64 bit systems does work quite differently which seems to have the nice property to remember the called methods not only during the first pass of exception filter clauses (during first pass all catch handler are called if they are going to catch the exception which is about to be thrown)  but also when the actual stack unwind has taken place. This makes it possible to follow not only the call stack right at the moment but also to look into the “history” of the catch/finally clauses. In a 64 bit process you only need to look at the ExceptionTracker to find out if a catch or finally handler was called. The two frames ProcessManagedCallFrame/CallHandler does indicate a finally clause whereas CallCatchHandler/CallHandler indicates a catch clause. That was a interesting one. Oh and by the way if you manage to load the Microsoft symbols you can also find out the hidden exception which. When you encounter in the call stack a line 0016eb34 75b79617 KERNELBASE!RaiseException+0x58 ====> Exception Code e0434f4d cxr@16e850 exr@16e838 Then it is a good idea to execute .exr 16e838 !analyze –v to find out more. In the managed world it is even easier since we can dump the objects allocated on the stack which have not yet been garbage collected to look at former method parameters. The command !dso which is the abbreviation for dump stack objects will give you 0:000> !dso OS Thread Id: 0x46c (0) ESP/REG  Object   Name 0016dd4c 020737f0 System.Exception 0016dd98 020737f0 System.Exception 0016dda8 01f5c6cc System.Windows.Forms.Button 0016ddac 01f5d2b8 System.EventHandler 0016ddb0 02071744 System.Windows.Forms.MouseEventArgs 0016ddc0 01f5d2b8 System.EventHandler 0016ddcc 01f5c6cc System.Windows.Forms.Button 0016dddc 020737f0 System.Exception 0016dde4 01f5d2b8 System.EventHandler 0016ddec 02071744 System.Windows.Forms.MouseEventArgs 0016de40 020737f0 System.Exception 0016de80 02071744 System.Windows.Forms.MouseEventArgs 0016de8c 01f5d2b8 System.EventHandler 0016de90 01f5c6cc System.Windows.Forms.Button 0016df10 02073784 System.SByte[] 0016df5c 02073684 System.NotImplementedException 0016e2a0 02073684 System.NotImplementedException 0016e2e8 01ed69f4 System.Resources.ResourceManager From there it is easy to do 0:000> !pe 02073684 Exception object: 02073684 Exception type: System.NotImplementedException Message: Die Methode oder der Vorgang sind nicht implementiert. InnerException: <none> StackTrace (generated):     SP       IP       Function     0016ECB0 006904AD WindowsFormsApplication2!WindowsFormsApplication2.Form1.F3()+0x35     0016ECC0 00690411 WindowsFormsApplication2!WindowsFormsApplication2.Form1.F2()+0x29     0016ECF0 0069038F WindowsFormsApplication2!WindowsFormsApplication2.Form1.F1(System.Object, System.EventArgs)+0x3f StackTraceString: <none> HResult: 80004001 to see the former exception. That´s all for today.

  Read the article

• Activation Error while testing Exception Handling Application Block

  - by CletusLoomis

  I'm getting the following error while testing my EHAB implementation: {"Activation error occured while trying to get instance of type ExceptionPolicyImpl, key "LogPolicy""} System.Exception Stack Trace: StackTrace " at Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation.ServiceLocatorImplBase.GetInstance(Type serviceType, String key) in c:\Home\Chris\Projects\CommonServiceLocator\main\Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation\ServiceLocatorImplBase.cs:line 53 at Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation.ServiceLocatorImplBase.GetInstance[TService](String key) in c:\Home\Chris\Projects\CommonServiceLocator\main\Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation\ServiceLocatorImplBase.cs:line 103 at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicy.GetExceptionPolicy(Exception exception, String policyName) in e:\Builds\EntLib\Latest\Source\Blocks\ExceptionHandling\Src\ExceptionHandling\ExceptionPolicy.cs:line 131 at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicy.HandleException(Exception exceptionToHandle, String policyName) in e:\Builds\EntLib\Latest\Source\Blocks\ExceptionHandling\Src\ExceptionHandling\ExceptionPolicy.cs:line 55 at Blackbox.Exception.ExceptionMain.LogException(Exception pException) in C:_Work_Black Box\Blackbox.Exception\ExceptionMain.vb:line 14 at BlackBox.Business.BusinessMain.TestExceptionHandling() in C:_Work_Black Box\BlackBox.Business\BusinessMain.vb:line 16 at Blackbox.Service.Service1.TestExceptionHandling() in C:_Work_Black Box\Blackbox.Service\Service.svc.vb:line 43" String Inner Exception: InnerException {"Resolution of the dependency failed, type = "Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicyImpl", name = "LogPolicy". Exception occurred while: Calling constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.TraceListeners.FormattedEventLogTraceListener(System.String source, System.String log, System.String machineName, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Formatters.ILogFormatter formatter). Exception is: ArgumentException - Event log names must consist of printable characters and cannot contain \, *, ?, or spaces At the time of the exception, the container was: Resolving Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicyImpl,LogPolicy Resolving parameter "policyEntries" of constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicyImpl(System.String policyName, System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable1[[Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicyEntry, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35]] policyEntries) Resolving Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicyEntry,LogPolicy.All Exceptions Resolving parameter "handlers" of constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicyEntry(System.Type exceptionType, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.PostHandlingAction postHandlingAction, System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable1[[Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.IExceptionHandler, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35]] handlers, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.Instrumentation.IExceptionHandlingInstrumentationProvider instrumentationProvider) Resolving Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.Logging.LoggingExceptionHandler,LogPolicy.All Exceptions.Logging Exception Handler (mapped from Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.IExceptionHandler, LogPolicy.All Exceptions.Logging Exception Handler) Resolving parameter "writer" of constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.Logging.LoggingExceptionHandler(System.String logCategory, System.Int32 eventId, System.Diagnostics.TraceEventType severity, System.String title, System.Int32 priority, System.Type formatterType, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogWriter writer) Resolving Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogWriterImpl,LogWriter.default (mapped from Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogWriter, (none)) Resolving parameter "structureHolder" of constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogWriterImpl(Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogWriterStructureHolder structureHolder, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Instrumentation.ILoggingInstrumentationProvider instrumentationProvider, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.ILoggingUpdateCoordinator updateCoordinator) Resolving Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogWriterStructureHolder,LogWriterStructureHolder.default (mapped from Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogWriterStructureHolder, (none)) Resolving parameter "traceSources" of constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogWriterStructureHolder(System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable1[[Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Filters.ILogFilter, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35]] filters, System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable1[[System.String, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089]] traceSourceNames, System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable1[[Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogSource, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35]] traceSources, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogSource allEventsTraceSource, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogSource notProcessedTraceSource, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogSource errorsTraceSource, System.String defaultCategory, System.Boolean tracingEnabled, System.Boolean logWarningsWhenNoCategoriesMatch, System.Boolean revertImpersonation) Resolving Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogSource,General Resolving parameter "traceListeners" of constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.LogSource(System.String name, System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable1[[System.Diagnostics.TraceListener, System, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089]] traceListeners, System.Diagnostics.SourceLevels level, System.Boolean autoFlush, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Instrumentation.ILoggingInstrumentationProvider instrumentationProvider) Resolving Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.TraceListeners.ReconfigurableTraceListenerWrapper,Event Log Listener (mapped from System.Diagnostics.TraceListener, Event Log Listener) Resolving parameter "wrappedTraceListener" of constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.TraceListeners.ReconfigurableTraceListenerWrapper(System.Diagnostics.TraceListener wrappedTraceListener, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.ILoggingUpdateCoordinator coordinator) Resolving Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.TraceListeners.FormattedEventLogTraceListener,Event Log Listener?implementation (mapped from System.Diagnostics.TraceListener, Event Log Listener?implementation) Calling constructor Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.TraceListeners.FormattedEventLogTraceListener(System.String source, System.String log, System.String machineName, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Formatters.ILogFormatter formatter) "} System.Exception My web.config is as follows: <?xml version="1.0"?> <configuration> <configSections> <section name="loggingConfiguration" type="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Configuration.LoggingSettings, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" requirePermission="true" /> <section name="exceptionHandling" type="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.Configuration.ExceptionHandlingSettings, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" requirePermission="true" /> </configSections> <loggingConfiguration name="" tracingEnabled="true" defaultCategory="General"> <listeners> <add name="Event Log Listener" type="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.TraceListeners.FormattedEventLogTraceListener, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" listenerDataType="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Configuration.FormattedEventLogTraceListenerData, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" source="Enterprise Library Logging" formatter="Text Formatter" log="C:\Blackbox.log" machineName="." traceOutputOptions="LogicalOperationStack, DateTime, Timestamp, Callstack" /> </listeners> <formatters> <add type="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Formatters.TextFormatter, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" template="Timestamp: {timestamp}{newline}&#xA;Message: {message}{newline}&#xA;Category: {category}{newline}&#xA;Priority: {priority}{newline}&#xA;EventId: {eventid}{newline}&#xA;Severity: {severity}{newline}&#xA;Title:{title}{newline}&#xA;Machine: {localMachine}{newline}&#xA;App Domain: {localAppDomain}{newline}&#xA;ProcessId: {localProcessId}{newline}&#xA;Process Name: {localProcessName}{newline}&#xA;Thread Name: {threadName}{newline}&#xA;Win32 ThreadId:{win32ThreadId}{newline}&#xA;Extended Properties: {dictionary({key} - {value}{newline})}" name="Text Formatter" /> </formatters> <categorySources> <add switchValue="All" name="General"> <listeners> <add name="Event Log Listener" /> </listeners> </add> </categorySources> <specialSources> <allEvents switchValue="All" name="All Events" /> <notProcessed switchValue="All" name="Unprocessed Category" /> <errors switchValue="All" name="Logging Errors &amp; Warnings"> <listeners> <add name="Event Log Listener" /> </listeners> </errors> </specialSources> </loggingConfiguration> <exceptionHandling> <exceptionPolicies> <add name="LogPolicy"> <exceptionTypes> <add name="All Exceptions" type="System.Exception, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" postHandlingAction="NotifyRethrow"> <exceptionHandlers> <add name="Logging Exception Handler" type="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.Logging.LoggingExceptionHandler, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.Logging, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" logCategory="General" eventId="100" severity="Error" title="Enterprise Library Exception Handling" formatterType="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.TextExceptionFormatter, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling" priority="0" /> </exceptionHandlers> </add> </exceptionTypes> </add> <add name="WcfExceptionShielding"> <exceptionTypes> <add name="InvalidOperationException" type="System.InvalidOperationException, mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" postHandlingAction="ThrowNewException"> <exceptionHandlers> <add type="Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.WCF.FaultContractExceptionHandler, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.WCF, Version=5.0.414.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" exceptionMessageResourceType="" exceptionMessageResourceName="This is the message" exceptionMessage="This is the exception" faultContractType="Blackbox.Service.WCFFault, Blackbox.Service, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null" name="Fault Contract Exception Handler"> <mappings> <add source="{Guid}" name="Id" /> <add source="{Message}" name="MessageText" /> </mappings> </add> </exceptionHandlers> </add> </exceptionTypes> </add> </exceptionPolicies> </exceptionHandling> <connectionStrings> <add name="CompassEntities" connectionString="metadata=~\bin\CompassModel.csdl|~\bin\CompassModel.ssdl|~\bin\CompassModel.msl;provider=Devart.Data.Oracle;provider connection string=&quot;User Id=foo;Password=foo;Server=foo64mo;Home=OraClient11g_home1;Persist Security Info=True&quot;" providerName="System.Data.EntityClient" /> <add name="BlackboxEntities" connectionString="metadata=~\bin\BlackboxModel.csdl|~\bin\BlackboxModel.ssdl|~\bin\BlackboxModel.msl;provider=System.Data.SqlClient;provider connection string=&quot;Data Source=sqldev1\cps;Initial Catalog=FundServ;Integrated Security=True;MultipleActiveResultSets=True&quot;" providerName="System.Data.EntityClient" /> </connectionStrings> <system.web> <compilation debug="true" strict="false" explicit="true" targetFramework="4.0" /> </system.web> <system.serviceModel> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior> <!-- To avoid disclosing metadata information, set the value below to false and remove the metadata endpoint above before deployment --> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="true"/> <!-- To receive exception details in faults for debugging purposes, set the value below to true. Set to false before deployment to avoid disclosing exception information --> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="false"/> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> <serviceHostingEnvironment multipleSiteBindingsEnabled="true" /> </system.serviceModel> <system.webServer> <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true"/> </system.webServer> </configuration> My code is as follows: Public Shared Function LogException(ByVal pException As System.Exception) As Boolean Return ExceptionPolicy.HandleException(pException, "LogPolicy") End Function Any assistance is appreciated.

  Read the article

• When would you prefer to declare an exception rather than handling it in Java?

  - by Epitaph

  I know we can declare the exception for our method if we want it to be handled by the calling method. This will even allow us to do stuff like write to the OutputStream without wrapping the code in try/catch block if the enclosing method throws IOException. My question is: Can anyone provide an instance where this is usually done where you'd like the super class to handle the exception instead of the current method?

  Read the article

• Java Terminology: Why compile-time error and not compile-time exception?

  - by Mandar

  This may sound awkward ... But I didn't understand it. Why do we have compile-time error and not compile-time exception in java ? I mean to say that we never say compile-time exception. We tend to say it as compile-time error. Is there any specific reason for the same ?? Any suggestions are welcomed.... Thanks !

  Read the article

• In Asp.net i'm not able to catch any exception properly?

  - by Anand

  In Asp.net (c#),i'm not able to catch exception(FileNotFoundException) properly... i don't know the reason..Actually File s not there..But catch statement fails to catch the exception.. here is the code.. try { System.Drawing.Image imgg1 = System.Drawing.Image.FromFile(Server.MapPath("").ToString() + "\\images\\img1.jpg"); } catch (FileNotFoundException) { Response.Write("<script>alert('Please Select and upload Student's Photo');</script>"); }

  Read the article

• In Asp.net (c#) i'm not able to catch any exception properly????

  - by Anand

  In Asp.net (c#),i'm not able to catch exception(FileNotFoundException) properly... i don't know the reason..Actually File s not there..But catch statement fails to catch the exception.. here is the code.. try { System.Drawing.Image imgg1 = System.Drawing.Image.FromFile(Server.MapPath("").ToString() + "\\images\\img1.jpg"); } catch (FileNotFoundException) { Response.Write("<script>alert('Please Select and upload Student's Photo');</script>"); }

  Read the article

• MSTest Test Context Exception Handling

  - by Flip

  Is there a way that I can get to the exception that was handled by the MSTest framework using the TestContext or some other method on a base test class? If an unhandled exception occurs in one of my tests, I'd like to spin through all the items in the exception.Data dictionary and display them to the test result to help me figure out why the test failed (we usually add data to the exception to help us debug in the production env, so I'd like to do the same for testing). Note: I am not testing that an exception was SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN (I have other tests for that), I am testing a valid case, I just need to see the exception data. Here is a code example of what I'm talking about. [TestMethod] public void IsFinanceDeadlineDateValid() { var target = new BusinessObject(); SetupBusinessObject(target); //How can I capture this in the text context so I can display all the data //in the exception in the test result... var expected = 100; try { Assert.AreEqual(expected, target.PerformSomeCalculationThatMayDivideByZero()); } catch (Exception ex) { ex.Data.Add("SomethingImportant", "I want to see this in the test result, as its important"); ex.Data.Add("Expected", expected); throw ex; } } I understand there are issues around why I probably shouldn't have such an encapsulating method, but we also have sub tests to test all the functionality of PerformSomeCalculation... However, if the test fails, 99% of the time, I rerun it passes, so I can't debug anything without this information. I would also like to do this on a GLOBAL level, so that if any test fails, I get the information in the test results, as opposed to doing it for each individual test. Here is the code that would put the exception info in the test results. public void AddDataFromExceptionToResults(Exception ex) { StringBuilder whereAmI = new StringBuilder(); var holdException = ex; while (holdException != null) { Console.WriteLine(whereAmI.ToString() + "--" + holdException.Message); foreach (var item in holdException.Data.Keys) { Console.WriteLine(whereAmI.ToString() + "--Data--" + item + ":" + holdException.Data[item]); } holdException = holdException.InnerException; } }

  Read the article

• correct way to store an exception in a variable

  - by Evan Teran

  I have an API which internally has some exceptions for error reporting. The basic structure is that it has a root exception object which inherits from std::exception, then it will throw some subclass of that. Since catching an exception thrown in one library and catching it in another can lead to undefined behavior (at least Qt complains about it and disallows it in many contexts). I would like to wrap the library calls in functions which will return a status code, and if an exception occurred, a copy of the exception object. What is the best way to store an exception (with it's polymorphic behavior) for later use? I believe that the c++0x futures API makes use of something like this. So what is the best approach? The best I can think of is to have a clone() method in each exception class which will return a pointer to an exception of the same type. But that's not very generic and doesn't deal with standard exceptions at all. Any thoughts?

  Read the article

• error catching exception while System.out.print

  - by user1702633

  I have 2 classes, one that implements a double lookup( int i); and one where I use that lookup(int i) in solving a question, or in this case printing the lookup values. This case is for an array. So I read the exception documentation or google/textbook and come with the following code: public double lookup(int i) throws Exception { if( i > numItems) throw new Exception("out of bounds"); return items[i]; } and take it over to my class and try to print my set, where set is a name of the object type I define in the class above. public void print() { for (int i = 0; i < set.size() - 1; i++) { System.out.print(set.lookup(i) + ","); } System.out.print(set.lookup(set.size())); } I'm using two print()'s to avoid the last "," in the print, but am getting an unhandled exception Exception (my exception's name was Exception) I think I have to catch my exception in my print() but cannot find the correct formatting online. Do I have to write catch exception Exception? because that gives me a syntax error saying invalid type on catch. Sources like http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/exceptions/ are of little help to me, I'm can't seem to grasp what the text is telling me. I'm also having trouble finding sources with multiple examples where I can actually understand the coding in the examples. so could anybody give me a source/example for the above catch phrase and perhaps a decent source of examples for new Java programmers? my book is horrendous and I cannot seem to find an understandable example for the above catch phrase online.

  Read the article

• Isn't it better to use a single try catch instead of tons of TryParsing and other error handling sometimes?

  - by Ryan Peschel

  I know people say it's bad to use exceptions for flow control and to only use exceptions for exceptional situations, but sometimes isn't it just cleaner and more elegant to wrap the entire block in a try-catch? For example, let's say I have a dialog window with a TextBox where the user can type input in to be parsed in a key-value sort of manner. This situation is not as contrived as you might think because I've inherited code that has to handle this exact situation (albeit not with farm animals). Consider this wall of code: class Animals { public int catA, catB; public float dogA, dogB; public int mouseA, mouseB, mouseC; public double cow; } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { string input = "Sets all the farm animals CAT 3 5 DOG 21.3 5.23 MOUSE 1 0 1 COW 12.25"; string[] splitInput = input.Split(' '); string[] animals = { "CAT", "DOG", "MOUSE", "COW", "CHICKEN", "GOOSE", "HEN", "BUNNY" }; Animals animal = new Animals(); for (int i = 0; i < splitInput.Length; i++) { string token = splitInput[i]; if (animals.Contains(token)) { switch (token) { case "CAT": animal.catA = int.Parse(splitInput[i + 1]); animal.catB = int.Parse(splitInput[i + 2]); break; case "DOG": animal.dogA = float.Parse(splitInput[i + 1]); animal.dogB = float.Parse(splitInput[i + 2]); break; case "MOUSE": animal.mouseA = int.Parse(splitInput[i + 1]); animal.mouseB = int.Parse(splitInput[i + 2]); animal.mouseC = int.Parse(splitInput[i + 3]); break; case "COW": animal.cow = double.Parse(splitInput[i + 1]); break; } } } } } In actuality there are a lot more farm animals and more handling than that. A lot of things can go wrong though. The user could enter in the wrong number of parameters. The user can enter the input in an incorrect format. The user could specify numbers too large or too small for the data type to handle. All these different errors could be handled without exceptions through the use of TryParse, checking how many parameters the user tried to use for a specific animal, checking if the parameter is too large or too small for the data type (because TryParse just returns 0), but every one should result in the same thing: A MessageBox appearing telling the user that the inputted data is invalid and to fix it. My boss doesn't want different message boxes for different errors. So instead of doing all that, why not just wrap the block in a try-catch and in the catch statement just display that error message box and let the user try again? Maybe this isn't the best example but think of any other scenario where there would otherwise be tons of error handling that could be substituted for a single try-catch. Is that not the better solution?

  Read the article

• How do I add information to an exception message without changing its class in ruby?

  - by Andrew Grimm

  How do I add information to an exception message without changing its class in ruby? The approach I'm currently using is strings.each_with_index do |string, i| begin do_risky_operation(string) rescue raise $!.class, "Problem with string number #{i}: #{$!}" end end Is there a better way?

  Read the article

• How do you access the Source Error, Source File and Line Number of an exception to use in a custom e

  - by Iain Fraser

  Basically I want to take the following: And make it match the styling of the rest of the application. I am creating a custom error page in my C# based project and I want it to be able to show the same information that is displayed in the ASP.NET default error page. From fiddling with reflector I can see that this is generated through HttpException.GetHtmlErrorMessage() but when I try to use this in my exception it returns null.

  Read the article

• Do we really need to catch exception for P/Invoke methods?

  - by Ram

  I am using P/Invoke methods in my .NET application. As the functions are C++ functions; each one has return type like int, intptr or any struct. The return type is enough to tell me if the function was successful or not. Do I still need to catch generic or COM exception in this case?

  Read the article

• How to add global exception handling to a add-in dll?

  - by redjackwong

  Here's my context: I am writing a WPF add-in for an application. This Application's main thread is unmanaged. I want to add a global exception handling system for this add-in to handle any unhandled exceptions. Here's what I've tried but not working: I cannot add a try-catch block to my Application.Run() code line. Because I am an add-in, that code fragment is in the application. System.Windows.Forms.Application.ThreadException is not working too. There might not be an WinForm Application exists. (WPF hosting in unmanaged code.) AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException is not working too. Because maybe it's handled by the Application itself. It just doesn't enter my code. So, any ideas for this situation?

  Read the article

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