MSN: Catch him if you can: Texas A&M's gingerbread man fueling historic season
Catch him if you can: Texas A&M's gingerbread man fueling historic season
Yahoo: Lowe's Squishy Gingerbread Man Dog Toy Is an Easy Catch for Your Pup This Holiday Season
Lowe's Squishy Gingerbread Man Dog Toy Is an Easy Catch for Your Pup This Holiday Season
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 ...
Is there a way to catch both exceptions and only set WebId = Guid.Empty once? The given example is rather simple, as it's only a GUID, but imagine code where you modify an object multiple times, and if one of the manipulations fails as expected, you want to "reset" the object. However, if there is an unexpected exception, I still want to throw that higher.
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?
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.