<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<node id="230975" title="Re: Best Practices for Exception Handling" created="2003-01-29 10:28:47" updated="2005-07-27 17:32:25">
<type id="11">
note</type>
<author id="230012">
jonadab</author>
<data>
<field name="doctext">
&lt;p&gt;I tend to agree.  A lot of people with a lot more
experience than I have rave about how wonderful exception
handling is, but they've failed to communicate to me 
why it is valuable to be able to throw an exception in
one place and catch it someplace else rather than handling
the problem (assuming it can be handled by any means other
than spitting an error message and bailing) in the same
block of code where it is detected.  It seems to me that
having the exception and the handling thereof separated
by arbitrarily many lines of code is asking for headaches
in terms of code maintenance.  Rather than throwing the
exception in the first place, wouldn't it be better to
handle it en situ?  (Sure, sometimes a number of spots
can share the same code -- so call a subroutine then, 
but at least the call is right there.)
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;As I said, I have a good deal less experience than
a lot of the people who rave about exception handling,
so I'm probably missing something...&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt; --jonadab&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</field>
<field name="root_node">
230799</field>
<field name="parent_node">
230806</field>
</data>
</node>
