when I debug the below code, there is an SmbException and goes catch block line sb.append(pLogger.reportError(pStr, e));, but it does not go into the method reportError().
what is the reason behind this. please advise if any changes.
try {
sfos = new SmbFileOutputStream(sFile);
} catch (SmbException e) {
sb.append(pLogger.rError(pathStr, e));
}
below is rError() method
public String rError(String pxString,Exception e){
String errorToMailStr=null;
abcd="Verifying # "+pxString+"::Error ["+e.getMessage()+"]";
logger.debug("Error when verifying # "+pxString+":Error ["+gMsg(e)+"]");
return abcd;
}
at line logger.debug("Issue "+pxString+":Error ["+gMsg(e)+"]");
is going to below method and ends.
public abstract class ReflectiveCallable {
public Object run() throws Throwable {
try {
return runReflectiveCall();
} catch (InvocationTargetException e) {
throw e.getTargetException();
}
}
Based on what you have revealed here, there is a problem in getExceptionMsg()
Related
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)]
I want to get error message using java when exception are generated.
now I have java code with following scenario:
method first(){
try{
second();
}catch(Exception e){
System.out.println("Error:> "+e)
}
}
method second(){
try{
my code
}catch(Exception e){
throw new Exception("Exception generate in second method",e);
}
}
now when the first method execute then I get only "Exception generate in second method" message but there is some other message printed on console by java so how to get that console error message.
Note: I have already try with e.getMessage(); and e.printStackTrace();
Every exception has a cause that you can get with getCause(). You can go recursively down them until you get to the root cause. Here is your example with a utility that dumps the exception with all its causes like the console does.
private void first() {
try {
second();
} catch (Exception ex) {
Log.e("CATCH", getExceptionDump(ex));
}
}
private void second() {
try {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("We don't do this.");
} catch (Exception ex) {
throw new RuntimeException("Exception in second()", ex);
}
}
private String getExceptionDump(Exception ex) {
StringBuilder result = new StringBuilder();
for (Throwable cause = ex; cause != null; cause = cause.getCause()) {
if (result.length() > 0)
result.append("Caused by: ");
result.append(cause.getClass().getName());
result.append(": ");
result.append(cause.getMessage());
result.append("\n");
for (StackTraceElement element: cause.getStackTrace()) {
result.append("\tat ");
result.append(element.getMethodName());
result.append("(");
result.append(element.getFileName());
result.append(":");
result.append(element.getLineNumber());
result.append(")\n");
}
}
return result.toString();
}
The message in the Exception constructor argument is not printed in the exception detail.
You can simply use this code to print the message :
method first(){
try{
second();
}catch(Exception e){
System.out.println("Error:> "+e.getMessage())
}
}
Hope this solves your problem
Why you cannot use print stack trace ?
Because A throwable contains a snapshot of the execution stack of its thread at the time it was created. (see Throwable)
It implies that, if you want to print the stack trace you need to use the printStackTrace() method BUT in your second method !
method second(){
try {
my code
} catch(Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
throw new Exception("Exception generate in second method",e);
}
}
Or using a the tricky method setStackTrace and using the printStackTrace() in first
method second(){
try {
my code
} catch(Exception e) {
Exception ex = new Exception("Exception generate in second method",e);
ex.setStackTrace(e);
throw ex;
}
}
method first(){
try {
second();
} catch(Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
You can print the cause of the exception you get. Try this:
method first(){
try{
second();
}catch(Exception e){
System.out.println("Error:> "+e);
if (e.getCause() != null) {
System.out.println("Cause:> " + e.getCause());
}
}
}
I believe this is the console message you want to achieve:
Error:> java.lang.Exception: Exception generate in second method
Try this code, when the catch block of the second method throws an exception the second method should declare it as throws or put a nested try catch within the catch block.
The exception is propagated to the first() method which is handled by its catch block.
public class Test {
public void first() {
try {
second();
} catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println("Error:> " + e);
}
}
public void second() throws Exception {
try {
throw new Exception();
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new Exception("Exception generate in second method", e);
}
}
public static void main(String ars[]) {
Test test = new Test();
test.first();
}
}
Im trying to return a JOptionePane message dialog for each one of the possible throws on my method:
public void add_note(String note) throws FileNotFoundException, IOException, InvalidFormatException{
... content ...
}
Is there any way to do this?
You could try something like :
public void add_note(String note) throws FileNotFoundException, IOException, InvalidFormatException
{
try
{
...content...
}
catch(FileNotFoundException fnfEx)
{
throw new FileNotFoundException("File was not found");
}
catch(IOException ioEx)
{
throw new FileNotFoundException("I/O exception");
}
catch(InvalidFormatException invEx)
{
throw new FileNotFoundException("Invalid format errror");
}
}
Where you put the message you want in the new exceptions and you print the exception message in the JOptionPane.
wrap your code inside try catch. Inside catch block for each exception type throw the message specific to each exception
Using a Try-Catch you can catch any exception and return something when an exception occurs. You should do this for all of your cases.
public void add_note(String note){
try {
//code
} catch (FileNotFoundException e) {
//return something
}
}
Instead of throwing exceptions, handle each individually in your method:
public JOptionPane add_note(String note) {
try {
...
} catch (FileNotFoundException fnfe) {
return ...;
} catch (IOException ioe) {
return ...;
} catch (InvalidFormatException ife) {
return ...;
}
}
I'll suggest you an alternative approach, as no one mentioned it.
I'd use AOP to catch those exceptions and show to the end user. You'll write a simple aspect, and dont mess your code with try and catch blocks.
Here is an example of such aspect
#Aspect
public class ErrorInterceptor{
#AfterThrowing(pointcut = "execution(* com.mycompany.package..* (..))", throwing = "exception")
public void errorInterceptor(Exception exception) {
if (logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
logger.debug("Error Message Interceptor started");
}
// DO SOMETHING HERE WITH EXCEPTION
logger.debug( exception.getCause().getMessage());
if (logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
logger.debug("Error Message Interceptor finished.");
}
}
}
If you don't know what Aspect Oriented Programming is definitely go check it out, this is very powerfull concept (just like OOP), spend some time to learn it.
If you want to show a dialog with the JOptionPane.showMessageDialog do as follows:
public void add_note(String note){
try {
//code
} catch (FileNotFoundException | IOException | InvalidFormatException e) {
JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(frame, e.getMessage(), "Title", JOptionPane.ERROR_MESSAGE);
//manage the exception here
}
}
I seem to be stuck with a very simple task that would require GOTO statements and, in my opinion, would justify a use of those.
I have the very simple task to exit a void on different conditions. Within its code, several dozen operations are being done and most of them can fail. I test them with try {}.
Now, based on the criticality of the operation, I either need to exit immediately and do nothing else, or, I just need to interrupt control flow and jump to a final point to do some cleaning up and then exit the method.
MWE:
public void myMethod () {
try { op1(); } catch (Exception e) { return; } // Fail here: exit immediately
try { op2(); } catch (Exception e) { cleanUpFirst(); return; } // Fail here: do Cleaning up first, then exit
try { op3(); } catch (Exception e) { return; } // Fail here: exit immediately
try { op4(); } catch (Exception e) { cleanUpFirst(); return; } // Fail here: do Cleaning up first, then exit
try { op5(); } catch (Exception e) { cleanUpFirst(); return; } // Fail here: do Cleaning up first, then exit
// ....
}
public void cleanUpFirst() { /* do something to clean up */ }
For code readability, I'd like to a) avoid a separate function and b) do not have more than one statement within the catch block; it just blows up the code. So, in my opinion this would perfectly justify the use of a GOTO statement.
However, the only solution I came up with, given that only two outcomes are possible, is this:
public void myMethod () {
do {
try { op1(); } catch (Exception e) { return; }
try { op2(); } catch (Exception e) { break; }
try { op3(); } catch (Exception e) { return; }
try { op4(); } catch (Exception e) { break; }
try { op5(); } catch (Exception e) { break; }
// ....
} while (1==0);
/* do domething to clean up */
}
Yes, I have heard of exceptions and that is is the Java way. Is that not as overkilled as using the separate void? I do not need the specifics, I simply need a yes/no result from each operation. Is there a better way?
why not
boolean cleanupfirst = false;
try {
op1 ();
cleanupfirst = true;
op2 ();
cleanupfirst = false;
op3 ();
} catch (Exception e) {
if (cleanupfirst)
cleanup ();
return;
}
You're over-thinking it.
4 minor adjustments.
Let Opn() return a boolean for success or failure, rather than throwing an Excpetion.
Let CleanupFirst handle program termination (you can rename it to clean exit if you want). The new parameter passed to CleanExit is the System.exit code.
Use System.Exit to return a proper return code to the OS, so you can use it in scripting.
It does not seem like your program has a successful path.
if (!op1())
System.exit(1); // <- send a failed returncode to the OS.
if(!op2())
cleanExit(2);
if (!op3())
System.exit(3); // <- send a failed returncode to the OS.
if (!op4())
cleanExit(4);
if (!op5())
cleanExit(5);
cleanExit(0);
More methods for better readability:
public void myMethod() {
try {
tryOp1();
tryOp2();
...
} catch(Exception ignore) {}
}
public void tryOp1() throws Exception {
op1();
}
public void tryOp2() throws Exception {
try {
op1();
} catch (Exception e) {
cleanUp();
throw e;
}
}
I'm working on some server-side code that wraps all exceptions before passing them to the client side, due to this all client facing methods have the following code
try{
DoSomething();
} catch (ExceptionA e) {
throw new CustomException(AType, e);
} catch (ExceptionB e) {
throw new CustomException(BType, e);
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new CustomException(Unexpected, e);
}
to have this repeated in every method seems to violate the DRY principle and I was wondering what the best way to refactor it would be. For instance I was thinking a wrapper method such as:
private void wrapException(Exception e) {
if (e instanceof ExceptionA) {
throw new CustomException(AType, e);
}
etc...
Take a look at AspectJ soften exception.
Also look at Guava's Throwables.
There is also Lamboks sneaky exception.
The other option is to use Anonymous object instances aka closures.
public abstract class Wrapper {
public void execute() {
try {
// do some boiler plate before
this.wrap();
// do some boiler plate after.
} catch (ExceptionA | ExceptionB ex) {
Type t = determineType(ex);
throw new CustomException(t, ex);
}
}
public void abstract wrap();
}
Now in your code you do something like:
new Wrapper() {
public void wrap() {
DoSomething();
}
}.execute()
This is possible in Java7 and up:
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/catch-multiple.html
Copy-paste example from above doc:
catch (IOException|SQLException ex) {
logger.log(ex);
throw ex;
}
This is one way to go about it:
Exception caughtEx = null;
String extraInfo = null;
try{
DoSomething();
} catch (ExceptionA e) {
caughtEx = e;
extraInfo = AType;
} catch (ExceptionB e) {
caughtEx = e;
extraInfo = BType;
} catch (Exception e) { // catching Exception is usually a bad idea, just let it bubble up without catching...
caughtEx = e;
extraInfo = Unexpected;
}
if (caughtEx != null) throw new CustomException(extraInfo, caughtEx);