Skip to main content

Exception Handling? WTF??

A recent Daily WTF explored a Guard class which throws an ArgumentNullException if a parameter is null. Most of the commenters correctly point out that the code is not a WTF but rather a good practice because it

  • Enforces the code contract - this parameter is not allowed to be null
  • Provides better stack trace information
  • Causes the app to fail fast

One principle at work here is the idea of adding information to an exception. Without guarding against potentially invalid input in this situation, a NullReferenceException will (presumably) be thrown at some point. But why? What's null? What made it null? Even with the stack trace, this can be painful to debug... annoying at the least. An ArgumentNullException cuts straight to the problem and tells us exactly what is wrong. Anytime you can add information to an exception (or potential exception in this case), you should do it*.

I think this is a good principle to follow when deciding whether or not to catch an exception (that you can't recover from) as well. If you can add information by wrapping it in a more specific exception and adding contextual information, you should do so. Otherwise, there's no need to handle and re-throw.

*Well, not if might expose implementation details you want to hide from users.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Enabling Globalization Invariant Mode for .NET Core App on Raspberry Pi Running LibreElec

I had an app I wanted to run on my Raspberry Pi 3 running LibreElec . In LibreElec you can install the dotnet core 2.2 runtime as an addon, and in Visual Studio you can compile for ARM processors with ‘Target Runtime’ set to ‘linux-arm’ in the publish profile. So, I published to a folder from VS using that profile, and I copied the output over to my RPi which had the dotnet runtime installed. I did a simple dotnet Whatever.dll to run the app (actually in this case, it was /storage/.kodi/addons/tools.dotnet-runtime/bin/dotnet Whatever.dll because of the way the addon is installed) and was met with this error: FailFast: Couldn't find a valid ICU package installed on the system. Set the configuration flag System.Globalization.Invariant to true if you want to run with no globalization support. at System.Environment.FailFast(System.String) at System.Globalization.GlobalizationMode.GetGlobalizationInvariantMode() at System.Globalization.GlobalizationMode..cctor() at Syste
Post a Comment
Read more

Migrating Hg Repos with hg-fast-export and Windows Subsystem for Linux

Introduction I prefer Mercurial (hg) to git . I don’t really have any reason for this preference - they both do the same thing, and the user experience for 90% of the use cases is the same. It probably comes from the conditions of the DVCS landscape when I started using these systems. Some of this may have been perception only, but it looked like this: GitHub didn’t have free private repos BitBucket did have free private repos BitBucket was very hg-friendly Joel Spolsky had an amazing tutorial that served as both a how-to for hg as well as a general intro to DVCS hg was much more Windows-friendly than git Since hg was written in python, I felt like extending it would be easier than doing so for git if I ever needed to (admittedly, this is a pretty ridiculous reason) hg felt like a more unified, “coherent” system than the very linux-y feeling git and its extensions (also pretty ridiculous) Where they differed, I liked the verbs hg used better than git’s counterparts
Post a Comment
Read more

Stubbing Static Methods with PostSharp

TypeMock uses the Profiler API to allow mocking, stubbing, etc. of classes used by code under test. It has the ability to handle sealed classes, static classes, non-virtual methods, and other troublesome-yet-oft-encountered scenarios in the world of unit testing. Other frameworks rely on proxies to intercept method calls, limiting them to be able to only fake virtual, abstract, and interface members. They also rely on dependecy injection to place the proxies as the concrete implementation of calls to the abstracted interface members. Anyone working with a legacy codebase is bound to run into static method calls (especially in the data access layer), dependencies on concrete types with non-virtual methods, and sealed class dependencies (HttpContext anyone?). The only way to unit test this without refactoring is with TypeMock. I've never used TypeMock, and I'm sure it's a great product, but it's not free. I decided to spike some code to see if I could solve the prob
6 comments
Read more