Possible Duplicate:
difference between throw and throw new Exception()
What would be the point of just having
catch (Exception)
{
throw;
}
What does this do?
By itself, the throw
keyword simply re-raises the exception caught by the catch
statement above. This is handy if you want to do some rudimentary exception handling (perhaps a compensating action like rolling back a transaction) and then rethrow the exception to the calling method.
This method has one significant advantage over catching the exception in a variable and throwing that instance: It preserves the original call stack. If you catch (Exception ex) and then throw ex, your call stack will only start at that throw statement and you lose the method/line of the original error.
Sometimes you might want to do something like this:
try
{
// do some stuff that could cause SomeCustomException to happen, as
// well as other exceptions
}
catch (SomeCustomException)
{
// this is here so we don't double wrap the exception, since
// we know the exception is already SomeCustomException
throw;
}
catch (Exception e)
{
// we got some other exception, but we want all exceptions
// thrown from this method to be SomeCustomException, so we wrap
// it
throw new SomeCustomException("An error occurred saving the widget", e);
}
It rethrows the exact same error, you gain nothing by this.
Sometimes you can use the catch method to do some logging or something without interupting your exception like this:
catch (Exception) {
myLogger.Log(LogLevels.Exception, "oh noes!")
throw;
}
I initially mistakingly thought this would unwind your stack, but this would only be if you would do the following:
catch (Exception err) {
throw err;
}
Only reason I can think of is if you want to put a breakpoint there during debugging.
It's also the default code being generated by some tools I think.
Simply rethrow the current exception, and that exception will keep its "source" and the stack trace.
精彩评论