How can I continue after an error?

How can I continue after an error?

• Dee_dotnet_79

  Hi,

  The problem you are facing is not a problem but it is the intended behaviour of Try... Catch block

  Structure your Try ... Catch in the following manner to ensure that all the error causing routine are executed.

  Public Sub CauseErrors

  Try

  Error1(BadData)

  Catch

  -- Perform your error processing routine for Error1

  End Try

  Try

  Error2(BadData)

  Catch

  -- Perform your error processing routine for Error2

  End Try

  Try

  Error3(BadData)

  Catch

  -- Perform your error processing routine for Error3

  End Try

  End Sub

  Unless and until you have an alternate flow to rectify the exception in your Catch block i don't see a need to have more than Try... Catch block within a method. If there are code blocks that need to executed independentaly then they form an ideal candidate to isloate it as a seperate methods.

  Regards

  Arvind T N

  
  

• big fish713

  Micky D wrote:

  Hi, You posted something like this before, passing a string to a int property. A far better way to develop applications is to have the compiler pick up your mistakes without you doing so at runtime. In other words make your program type-safe and don't pass apples when the method is expecting oranges. Trying to test at runtime with non-type safe code will mean that you have to rely on 100% code coverage testing. It's far easier to let the compiler do it.

  Let's just let it go... I don't think anybody wants to see that argument pop up again

  
  
  

• kicks_joy_darkness

  ItchyAshcrackistan wrote:

  Thanks, I think I'll use a try for each like you suggested. See, I'm trying to make a program that demonstrates tons of different errors to show people how and where to deal with errors. For example, I pass an empty string to a function that accepts an Object, a function that accepts a number, a function that accepts a date, etc. and then I pass a number to a function that accepts an Object ... and so on ... to see what kind of errors are caused, and whether they are caused on the caller side or the callee side, so people don't try to handle something in the callee that will never go past the caller. I just want to purposely demonstrate ton's of different error situations as easily as possible, so it's not really intended to be "sound" programming, which is why your suggestion is going to work brilliantly. If you've ever done anything like this or have additional idea's on how I might make such a program, please let me know. Thanks.

  
  
  Hi,
  You posted something like this before, passing a string to a int property.
  
  A far better way to develop applications is to have the compiler pick up your mistakes without you doing so at runtime. In other words make your program type-safe and don't pass apples when the method is expecting oranges. Trying to test at runtime with non-type safe code will mean that you have to rely on 100% code coverage testing.
  
  It's far easier to let the compiler do it.
  
  
  

• LiamD

  Thanks, I think I'll use a try for each like you suggested. See, I'm trying to make a program that demonstrates tons of different errors to show people how and where to deal with errors.

  For example, I pass an empty string to a function that accepts an Object, a function that accepts a number, a function that accepts a date, etc. and then I pass a number to a function that accepts an Object ... and so on ... to see what kind of errors are caused, and whether they are caused on the caller side or the callee side, so people don't try to handle something in the callee that will never go past the caller.

  I just want to purposely demonstrate ton's of different error situations as easily as possible, so it's not really intended to be "sound" programming, which is why your suggestion is going to work brilliantly.

  If you've ever done anything like this or have additional idea's on how I might make such a program, please let me know.

  Thanks.

  
  
  
• How can I continue after an error?