Develop Reference

Maintaining multiple Exception types while exception chaining in single try-catch

I have a function that throws several different types of custom Exceptions. I wish to catch these exceptions from that function, add some important information, and then throw the exception as their original type to pass up the caller chain (exception chaining). I would like this to be compact in a single catch if possible.
I know Java 7+ has the functionality to handle multiple Exception types and throw them while maintaining their type. However, when exception chaining I cannot catch and throw multiple Exception types in the same catch block without losing the type. Is it possible to throw an exception maintaining its original type in a single catch block that accepts multiple Exception types? Or do I have to split it into 3 nearly-equivalent (essentially redundant) catch blocks?
Example:
void thisWorks() {
try {
someFunction(); // throws ExceptionA, ExceptionB, ExceptionC
} catch (ExceptionA | ExceptionB | ExceptionC exception) {
throw exception; // still has the original ExceptionA/ExceptionB/ExceptionC type
}
}
void whatIWant() {
try {
someFunction();
} catch (ExceptionA | ExceptionB | ExceptionC exception) {
// This throws an Exception, not the original ExceptionA/ExceptionB/ExceptionC type.
// Is it possible to fit this in a single block like the thisWorks() function?
// Or do I have to split into 3 catch blocks just for the throw type?
throw new Exception("Important information here", exception);
}
}

i don't think there simple approach if you don't like multiple catch my approach would be something like this but to me one way or the other you still have some redundance either mutiple catch or do multiple instanceof your exception.
try {
someFunction()
} catch (Exception ex) {
if (ex instanceof ExceptionA) {
throw new ExceptionA("Important information here", ex);
} else if(ex instanceof ExceptionB){
throw new ExceptionB("Important information here", ex);
} else {
throw new ExceptionC("Important information here", ex);
}
}
public class MyThrowClass {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
try {
someFuntion(1);
} catch (Throwable t) {
throw new Exception("Important information here", t);
}
}
public static void someFuntion(int value) throws ExceptionA, ExceptionB {
if (value == 1) {
throw new ExceptionA("Exception A");
}
throw new ExceptionB("Exception B");
}
}

Multiple Catch blocks vs Catching in Base Exception class

Assuming we are talking about all the exceptions that extends base Exception class,
is:
try {
some code;
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
} catch (ExecutionException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
catch (MyOwnException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
same as:
try {
some code;
}
catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
I am wondering in which case I MUST use the former one?

In the 2nd option Exception will catch all exception, not only those explicitly listed in the first option.
Use the 1st option if you want to catch only selected exceptions, and respond differently to each.
If you want to catch only selected exceptions, and have the same response to all of them, you could use:
catch (InterruptedException | ExecutionException | MyOwnException e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}

It is good practice to use Exception sub classes rather than Exception class. If you use Exception then it would be difficult to debug.
Here is a link for reference
http://howtodoinjava.com/best-practices/java-exception-handling-best-practices/#3

If you have multiple exceptions which all are extending from...we'll say IndexOutOfBoundsException, then unless you specifically want to print a different message for StringIndexOutOfBoundsException or another sub-class you should catch an IndexOutOfBoundsException. On the other hand if you have multiple exceptions extending from the Exception class, it is proper format to create a multi-catch statement at least in JDK 1.8:
try {
// Stuff
}catch(InterruptedException | ClassNotFoundException | IOException ex) {
ex.printStackTrace();
}
The former one where you create multiple catch statements is if you were trying to do what I said before.
try {
// Stuff
}catch(StringIndexOutOfBoundsException se) {
System.err.println("String index out of bounds!");
}catch(ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException ae) {
System.err.println("Array index out of bounds!");
}catch(IndexOutOfBoundsException e) {
System.err.println("Index out of bounds!");
}

Get exception instance class name

I would like to know what the exception instance was in this situation:
try {
// some risky actions
} catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println("Get instance name there");
}
How can I achieve this?

Here you go:
try {
throw new ArithmeticException();
} catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println( e.getClass().getCanonicalName());
}
Output:
java.lang.ArithmeticException

The type of the exception is shown as part of the output of:
e.printStackTrace();
To get it programmatically you can use:
String exceptionClassName = e.getClass().getName();
It is poor form to have logic depending on exception sub types within a catch block. Sonar will flag this as a code violation (squid S1193).
Instead you should add multiple catch blocks to catch different types of exceptions:
try {
readFile(fileName);
}
catch (java.io.IOException e) {
LOG.error("Error accessing file {}", fileName, e);
}
catch (java.lang.IllegalArgumentException e) {
LOG.error("Invalid file name {}", fileName, e);
}
Note: Since Log4j 2 (and SLF4J 1.6+) you can add a throwable as the last parameter and it will be recognized as such. So the above will work!
Since Java 7 you can also do a multi-catch:
}
catch (java.io.IOException | java.lang.IllegalArgumentException e) {
LOG.error("Could not read the file {}", fileName, e);
}
The benefit of the multi-catch is that you can handle multiple exception types within a single catch block without having to revert to a common super class (like java.lang.Exception) that would include exception types you didn't want to handle.

Default exception logging is something like
try
{
//
}
catch (Exception e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
This will print the stacktrace of the exception to system.err

If you are looking to add some contextual information, you can take a look at Apache Commons ContextedRuntimeException
public static void main(String[] args) {
try {
doSomething();
} catch (ContextedRuntimeException e) {
System.out.println(e.getMessage());
System.out.println(e.getContextEntries());
}
}
private static void doSomething() {
int divisor = 0;
int dividend = 100;
int result;
try {
result = dividend / divisor; // Just throw an exception to test things....
System.out.print("DIVISION RESULT: "+result);
} catch (ArithmeticException e) {
throw new ContextedRuntimeException("Oops..division by zero not allowed", e)
.addContextValue("Divisor", divisor)
.addContextValue("Dividend", dividend);
}
}
would output:
Oops..division by zero not allowed
Exception Context:
[1:Divisor=0]
[2:Dividend=100]
---------------------------------
[(Divisor,0), (Dividend,100)]

Compiler forces to handle rethrow of unchecked exception

I have encountered a scenario while working with exceptions, following is the sample code.I am trying to understand why following code fails to compile. I am checking the exception type before rethrow which is unchecked exception.
public class TestException {
public void test() throws FileNotFoundException {
FileReader test = new FileReader("");
}
public static void main(String[] args){
TestException test=new TestException();
try {
test.test();
} catch (Exception e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
if(e instanceof ArithmeticException){
throw e;
}
else{
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}

You are still throwing a reference variable e of type Exception. Exception is a checked type. The compiler only knows the reference variable's type, not the referenced object's. If you want to keep main's method signature as-is, you'll need to either wrap e into an unchecked exception type (such as ArithmeticException):
if(e instanceof ArithmeticException){
throw new ArithmeticException(e.getMessage());
}
or cast it as an unchecked exception:
if(e instanceof ArithmeticException){
throw (ArithmeticException)e;
}

Since the reference variable e is of type java.lang.Exception, throw e will throw checked exception. Thus it has to be declared in throws section in the method signature.

Try changing your catch block as follows:-
if(e instanceof ArithmeticException){
throw (ArithmeticException)e;
}
else{
e.printStackTrace();
}

You could also use a hack with Generics to throw an checked Exception as an unchecked one:
http://www.gamlor.info/wordpress/2010/02/throwing-checked-excpetions-like-unchecked-exceptions-in-java/
I like to use this over throw new RuntimeException(e), since the latter creates unnecessary output in a Stacktrace and its harder to catch somewhere else (you have to check the cause instead of the excetion itself).

catch (Exception e) {
Here is the effective declaration of e.
if(e instanceof ArithmeticException){
Here you are doing a runtime check of the type of e.
throw e;
At this point the compile-time type of e is Exception. So the compiler enforces its rules.

I will suggest to use two catch blocks.
typechecking in catch block is not a good practice where you can catch that specific class using other catch statement.
catch (ArithmeticException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
throw e;
}
catch(Exception e)
{
e.printStackTrace();
}
#Silly Freak I agree with you.

If you throw any exception then you should handle it but in your program your are able to throw but nowhere you are handling the exception, so just handle the exception by adding throws in main class like this:-
package first;
import java.io.FileNotFoundException;
import java.io.FileReader;
class A3{
public void test() throws FileNotFoundException {
FileReader test = new FileReader("");
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception{
A3 test=new A3();
try {
test.test();
} catch (Exception e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
if(e instanceof ArithmeticException){
throw e;
}
else{
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}

Java7 multiple exception handling

I have been trying to find out answer to this question but did not get any satisfactory explanation. Here is some background:
Java 7 allows us to catch multiple exceptions in a single catch block provided those exceptions are from diffrent hierarchy. Eg:
try {
// some code
} catch(SQLException | FileNotFoundException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
} catch(Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
But if exceptions are from the same hierarchy we must use multiple catch blocks like:
try {
// some code
} catch(FileNotFoundException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
} catch(IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
But if I try to write code like below compiler complains that "The exception FileNotFoundException is already caught by the alternative IOException"
try {
// some code
} catch(FileNotFoundException | IOException e) { // compiler error
e.printStackTrace();
}
Now my question is: Why compiler reports an error in last case, can't it figure out that FileNotFoundException is special case of IOException? This would save code duplication when my exception handling logic is same.

Why compiler reports an error in last case, can't it figure out that FileNotFoundException is special case of IOException?
Because FileNotFoundException is a subclass of IOException. In other words, the "FileNotFoundException |" part is redundant.
The reason why the code below is ok...
} catch(FileNotFoundException e) {
...
} catch(IOException e) {
...
}
...is because here the IOException clause matters: If a SocketException is thrown for instance, it will pass the by the FileNotFoundException part, and get caught in the IOException clause.

When catching an exception you have order your catch clauses from the most specific to the most general.
Consider the following hierachy:
class MyException extends Exception {}
class MySubException extends MyException {}
If a part of your code throws MyException an an other part throws MySubException you have to catch MySubException first.
catch(MySubException e){
} catch(MyException e){
}
Its the same thing like using the instanceof operator.
If you test if an instance of MySubException is an instanceof MyException the result will be true.
mse = new MySubException();
if(mse instanceof MyException){
println("MyException");
} else if(mse instanceof MySubException){
println("MySubException");
}
This piece of code will never print "MySubException".
mse = new MySubException();
if(mse instanceof MySubException){
println("MySubException");
} else if(mse instanceof MyException){
println("MyException");
}
This would be the correct order.

Its because FileNotFoundException extends IOException, as you said its of same hierarchy, you cannot add them to same catch block.