try { WebId = new Guid(queryString["web"]); } catch (FormatException) { WebId = Guid.Empty; } catch (OverflowException) { WebId = Guid.Empty; } Is there a way to catch both exceptions and only set WebId = Guid.Empty once? The given example is rather simple, as it's only a GUID, but imagine code where you modify an object multiple times, and if one of the manipulations fails as expected, you ...
I think that this only works if you raise and then catch the exception, but not if you try getting the traceback before raising an exception object that you create, which you might want to do in some designs.
Note that most crashes are not caused by exceptions in C++. You can catch all exceptions, but that won't prevent many crashes.
try { do-nonexistent-command } catch [System.Management.Automation.CommandNotFoundException] { write-host 'CommandNotFoundException' } catch { write-host 'well, darn' } That output 'CommandNotFoundException' correctly. I vaguely remember reading elsewhere (though I couldn't find it again) of problems with this. In such cases where exception filtering didn't work correctly, they would catch the ...
Given a classic ABAP exception like the following: MESSAGE ID 'XYZ' TYPE 'E' NUMBER 123 RAISING exception_name How do I catch this exception in the calling code? I have tried try/catch, CASE sy-su...
Both constructs (catch () being a syntax error, as sh4nx0r rightfully pointed out) behave the same in C#. The fact that both are allowed is probably something the language inherited from C++ syntax. , can throw objects that do not derive from System.Exception. In these languages, catch will handle those non-CLS exceptions, but catch (Exception) won't.