throw

This question already has answers here : How to use Java-style throws keyword in C#? (8 answers) Possible Duplicate: how to use Java-style throws keyword in C#? i have a function where an exception occurs say for example private void functionName() throws Exception { // some code that might throw an exception } thanks! No, because there are no checked exceptions in C# If you are trying to document exceptions that are thrown, use the standard xml documentation /// <exception cref="InvalidOperationException">Why it's thrown.</exception> No. There is no such construct in c#. But you can add the

PEP 342 (Coroutines via Enhanced Generators) added a throw() method to generator objects, which allows the caller to raise an exception inside the generator (as if it was thrown by the yield expression). I am wondering what the use cases for this feature are. Let's say I use a generator to handle adding information to a database; I use this to store network-received information, and by using a generator I can do this efficiently whenever I actually receive data, and do other things otherwise. So, my generator first opens a database connection, and every time you send it something, it'll add a

Possible Duplicate: design by contract tests by assert or by exception? Is there a rule of thumb to follow when deciding to use exceptions instead of asserts (or vice versa). Right now I do only throw if its something I think will happen during runtime on the user side (like a socket or file error). Almost everything else I use asserts. Also, if I were to throw an assert, what is a nice standard object to throw? IIRC there is std::logic_error but that is not a good object to throw? what would I throw for a missing file or unexpected input (such as from the command line instead of a frontend

I am trying to make it clear of the difference between Throws in method signature and Throw Statements in Java. Throws in method signature is as following: public void aMethod() throws IOException{ FileReader f = new FileReader("notExist.txt"); } Throw Statements is as following: public void bMethod() { throw new IOException(); } From my understanding, a throws in method signature is a notification that the method may throw such an exception. throw statement is what actually throw a created object under according circumstances. In that sense, throws in method signature should always appear if

I have a unit test that tests if method throws an exception when condition is present, and method does throws exception as expected. - (void)testMethodThrowsWhenConditionIsPresent { XCTAssertThrows([Foo methodWithCondition: condition], @"Condition is true, method should throw exception"); } Here is the exception source: - (void)methodWithCondition:(someType)condition { if (condition) { [NSException raise: @"condition is true!" format: @"condition is true!"]; } } Why does the test stop at the line the exception is thrown? The test does not go on, it stops at that line, when I expect it to

For the code below, result is "EA Exception Finished", which means although we threw at derived class it caught by base class. Is it always? And if so, how can I make the derived class catches, thus "EB Exception Finished" appears? Also I can't exactly get what does it mean by throw EB() and catch(EA&) . And does catch(EA&) means the catch block gets a reference for EA object ? Sorry for my ignorance. If you recommend me a book or something to refer about exception structure, that'd be great help. class EA {}; class EB: public EA {}; void F() { throw EB(); // throw at EB(). } int main() { try

In Chrome, when an exception occurs, it prints a stack trace to the console log. This is extremely useful, but unfortunately in cases where an exception has been rethrown this causes an issue. } catch (e) { if (foo(e)) { // handle the exception } else { // The stack traces points here throw e; } } Unfortunately, the following code in jQuery.js is causing all exceptions to have this issue if they're from inside event handlers. try { while( callbacks[ 0 ] ) { callbacks.shift().apply( context, args ); } } // We have to add a catch block for // IE prior to 8 or else the finally // block will never

#include <iostream> using namespace std; constexpr int f(bool b){ return b ? throw 0 : 0; } // OK constexpr int f() { return f(true); } // Ill-Formed, No Diagnostic Required int main(){ try{ f(); }catch( int x ){ cout << "x = " << x << endl; } return 0; } This code is an example from the C++14 Standard (ISO/IEC 14882:2014), Section 7.1.5, Paragraph 5: For a non-template, non-defaulted constexpr function or a non-template, non-defaulted, non-inheriting constexpr constructor, if no argument values exist such that an invocation of the function or constructor could be an evaluated subexpression of