What is faster: try catch vs Promise

问题

I heard such an opinion that you should avoid usage of try/catch at all because it takes many resources. So could promise error handling could be faster? Or it does not matter at all?

function f(somethingDangerous) {
  return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
    // try {
    //   somethingDangerous();
    //   resolve();
    // } catch (err) {
    //   reject(err);
    // }

    // VS

    somethingDangerous();
    resolve();
  }).catch((err) => {
    console.error('Catched: ' + err);
  });
}

f(() => {throw 'DANGEROUS THING';});

UPD: I know that try/catch won't works with async code inside. I'm just wondering if there any reasons to avoiding of try/catch because of performance issues? And is there any difference between two approaches above?

UPD2: Tried to race my horses :) https://jsperf.com/try-catch-vs-promise

回答1:

You should use Promises only for asynchronous functions and nothing else. Do not abuse them as an error monad, that would be a waste of resources and their inherent asynchrony will make every­thing more cumbersome.

When you have synchronous code, use try/catch for exception handling.

/* Wrong */
return new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
    resolve(x / y);
}).catch(err => NaN)

/* Right */
try {
    return x / y;
} catch(e) {
    return NaN;
}

Iff you already have promise code, you can avoid that in certain situations: when you want the exception to reject the promise. In those cases you should just let the builtin error handling of your promises do its job, and not complicate everything by an additional but pointless try/catch layer:

/* Wrong */
new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
    try { // when used synchronous in the executor callback
        …
        resolve(somethingSynchronous());
    } catch (e) {
        reject(e);
    }
});

/* Right */
new Promise(function(resolve, reject) {
    …
    resolve(somethingExceptionally());
});

/* Wrong */
….then(function(res) {
    try {
        …
        return somethingExceptionally();
    } catch(e) {
        return Promise.reject(e);
    }
}).…

/* Right */
….then(function(res) {
    …
    return somethingExceptionally();
}).…

回答2:

try/catch idiom works very well when you have fully synchronous code, but asynchronous operations render it useless, no errors will be caught. i.e., the function will begin its course while the outer stack runs through and gets to the last line without any errors. If an error occurs at some point in the future inside asynchronous function – nothing will be caught.

When we use Promises, “we’ve lost our error handling”, you might say. That’s right, we don’t need to do anything special here to propagate error because we return a promise and there’s built in support for error flow.

回答3:

Based on this benchmark i found it doesn't seem like most applications performance would be affected by such decision.

https://jsperf.com/try-catch-vs-promise

NOTE: try/catch does work with asynchronous code at least when using "async/await"!

来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/42648956/what-is-faster-try-catch-vs-promise