Both constructs (catch () being a syntax error, as sh4nx0r rightfully pointed out) behave the same in C#. The fact that both are allowed is probably something the language inherited from C++ syntax. , can throw objects that do not derive from System.Exception. In these languages, catch will handle those non-CLS exceptions, but catch (Exception) won't.
That output 'CommandNotFoundException' correctly. I vaguely remember reading elsewhere (though I couldn't find it again) of problems with this. In such cases where exception filtering didn't work correctly, they would catch the closest Type they could and then use a switch. The following just catches Exception instead of RuntimeException, but is the switch equivalent of my first example that ...
1622 I want to catch and log exceptions without exiting, e.g., ... I want to print the exact same output that is printed when the exception is raised without the try/except intercepting the exception, and I do not want it to exit my program.
Also note, if you swap around the two catch blocks, it wont compile. The second catch would be completely unreachable. Note the finally block always runs even if a catch block is executed (other than silly cases, such as infinite loops, attaching through the tools interface and killing the thread, rewriting bytecode, etc.).
Does using the 'catch, when' feature make exception handling faster because the handler is skipped as such and the stack unwinding can happen much earlier as when compared to handling the specific use cases within the handler?
Try/Catch will only 'trigger' on a terminating exception. Most cmdlets in PowerShell, by default, won't throw terminating exceptions. You can set the error action ...