In my experience try/catch blocks have been most useful in dealing with sdk component life-cycle errors.
It is useful to throw custom errors for debugging purposes but rarely do i need to handle them in a production environment and run another process. Bjorn --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton <g...@...> wrote: > > I guess the other thing to consider is where you are using them. If > you put them in code that's called frequently it's probably more of a > problem than if you are using them in code that's called occasionally. > > > On 05/03/2009, at 10:42 AM, Sam Lai wrote: > > > I thought Alex said before that exceptions don't appear for users > > running the standard Flash Player (i.e. not the debug one). Hence the > > user won't even know something went wrong; rather the app will > > probably just enter some unknown/unusable state and effectively > > freeze. > > > > There are cases for using try-catch when there is no other option. But > > when there are, e.g. testing the type of a variable before casting it > > or using a fault handler, try-catch should not be used. That could > > make the code a bit convoluted though, so in cases where errors can > > occur at many points (e.g. processing data files from an external > > server) a try-catch may be preferable, not only for code style, but > > also because you are unlikely to be able to pre-empt and mitigate all > > the errors that might occur. > > > > 2009/3/5 Weyert de Boer <w...@...>: > > > I respectfully disagree with not handling exceptions and let them > > raised > > > in the player. Of course, eating exceptions is terribly bad. Yes, > > > raising exceptions because user input is bad is a long stretch. > > > > > >> Hi Kevin, > > >> > > >> Try-Catch blocks are an absolute necessity as without them, you are > > >> putting the operation of your software into the hands of user input > > >> errors, http errors, unintended consequences as well as the > > myriad of > > >> things that exist outside the "Happy Path". > > >> > > >> I respectfully disagree. IMHO, try-catch is only useful in rare > > >> situations; like file IO in an Air app. User input should be > > handled > > >> with restict and validators and http errors should be handled > > with a > > >> fault handler. What I'm saying is that well written/tested code > > >> rarely needs the overhead and verboseness of a try-catch block. In > > >> the event of un-caught errors, I personally want the Flash window > > to > > >> popup. While the dialog could be more elegant, the stack trace > > makes > > >> it easier to locate the problem and fix the bug quickly. Again, > > just > > >> my opinion. > > >> > > >> -TH > > >> > > >> --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Benz" <kbenz@> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Try-Catch blocks are an absolute necessity as without them, you > > are > > >> > putting the operation of your software into the hands of user > > input > > >> > errors, http errors, unintended consequences as well as the > > myriad of > > >> > things that exist outside the "Happy Path". As functions/ > > methods only > > >> > give you one return object, it is common practice to throw custom > > >> > errors/exceptions as they are a great mechanism for handling > > dynamic > > >> > environments. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > To answer your second question about a try-catch without > > statements in > > >> > the catch block. If this method is nested inside of another try- > > catch > > >> > block, then an exception here will be swallowed and not be > > caught in the > > >> > calling objects try-catch. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > KFB > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com > > ] On > > >> > Behalf Of SJF > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 6:54 PM > > >> > To: flexcoders > > >> > Subject: [flexcoders] try, catch, finally ... > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Technically, it's good practice/professional to use try-catch- > > finally > > >> > blocks in your actionscript logic. This ensures a robust, easily > > >> > debugg-able application. > > >> > > > >> > However, can anyone comment if they actually use try-catch- > > finally or > > >> > whether anyone is for or against it's use. > > >> > > > >> > I ask because I've received an application (which streams > > vidoe) that > > >> > was blowing out numerous users CPUs to 100%. Upon further > > investigation, > > >> > it appears that a netstream event is firing 20 times a second, > > and > > >> > within the listener (listener function that is) for the event, > > there is > > >> > a try-catch-finally block. I removed the try-catch-finally and > > CPU usage > > >> > halved on my machine. > > >> > > > >> > Anyone care to comment for or against try-catch-finally and > > it's use. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Steve. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > This message has been scanned for viruses and > > >> > dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/ > > > , and is > > >> > > > >> > believed to be clean. > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > -- > > > Flexcoders Mailing List > > > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/ > > flexcodersFAQ.txt > > > Alternative FAQ location: > > > https://share.acrobat.com/adc/document.do?docid=942dbdc8-e469-446f-b4cf-1e62079f6847 > > > Search Archives: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.comYahoo > > ! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
