If statements in catch blocks

Can you use if statements in catch blocks?
(See below) Any help would be appreciated..
catch (Exception e)
// System.out.println("input error");
if (deposit < 0)
System.out.println("input error");
System.out.println( "Balance is "+ patricksChecking.getBalance());

Not only is there no good to catching an exception that's never thrown, as the previous-previous poster pointed out, you won't even be able to compile.
For those who are not using the finally bloc in exception handling, it can be indispensible.

Similar Messages

Return statement in catch block !

Hello Java Gurus,
The code is not compiling when i remove return from the catch block
i dont really understand the essence of return statement in catch block
any help is greatly appreciated !
Thanks in advance !
import java.io.*;
public class fileinputstream {
   public static void main(String arg[]) {
        FileInputStream fin ;
        FileOutputStream fout;
       try {
             fin =new     FileInputStream("input_file.txt");
             int bytes_av = fin.available();
             System.out.println("bytes available the input file "+bytes_av);
       catch(FileNotFoundException e)
           System.out.println("The input file is not present");
           return;
       catch(IOException e)
           System.out.println("error while giving bytes available the input file");
           return;
       try
                 fout =new FileOutputStream("output_file.txt");
       catch(FileNotFoundException e)
           System.out.println("The output file cannot be created");
           return;
       int data=0;
       try {
           data =(int)fin.read();
       catch(IOException e) {
           System.out.println("Exception while reading from file");
        while(-1!=data)      {
                   try
                   fout.write(data);
                   catch(IOException e)
                       System.out.println("Error while writing to file");
                   try
                       data =(int)fin.read();
                   catch(IOException e)
                       System.out.println("Exception while reading from file");
        try {
               fin.close();
               fout.close();
        catch(IOException e) {
           System.out.println("Error while closing files");
}

You do understand what "return" means, don't you? It
exits the method, main() in this case.
So the return statements in the catch blocks end the
program. If you remove the return statements, the
program will continue with the code after the catch
blocks. It needs the variables "fout" and "fin"
there, and these must be initialised.
If there are no return statements in the catch
blocks, the variables "fin" and "fout" will be not
initialized when you get to the code that uses them,
and that's an error. The java compiler is telling you
that you must always initialise the variables (you
can set them to "null", for example).Great explanation !!!
Thanks !

Return statement inside a catch block???

If you put a return statement inside of a catch block, what statements will be executed next? I.e., what happens to the flow of control?

If you put a return statement inside of a catchblock, what statements will be executed next? I.e.,
what
happens to the flow of control?If you write a short testing sample, compile it and
run it, what do you get as a result ?
Eek! That actually involves effort! Are you kidding?Kidding ? Me ?
I'd better waste my time writing programs for lazy OPs !
;)

Return statement at the end of try or after catch blocks

Hi
Can anyone tell me which is the better practice - to put the return statement at the end of try block or after all the catch blocks ie at the end of method.
Eg
Method A()
String str;
try{
str= [some code]
return str
catch(Exception e)
System.out.println("Exception");
} // end of method
OR
Method B()
String str;
try{
str= [some code]
}catch(Exception e)
System.out.println("Exception");
return str
} // end of method

I always try to work with only one exit point for each method.
For readability I always put the return statement as close to the end of the method as possible.
In this particular question,
I think you should put the return at the end of the method (for readability, since this is what you are
familiar with), but when I have a try-catch clause, I usually have an unrecoverable error and
should throw this further down the tree, so it usually becomes
try{
   return
}catch(...){
   // write out some logging information
   rethrow exception or throw another exception
}I think you should NEVER reflect the occurence of an error in the return-value of the
method when an unrecoverable exception occurs. Just rethrow this exception or throw another method.
Other methods look like
   Object result = new...
   return result;As for the specific case of a repetitive if-case:
This is possible in two versions:
With one return and a result-object
Object result = new ...
if(..)
   result = ...
else if(..)
   result = ...
return result;With every time a return
if(...)
   return ...;
else if(...)
   return ...;For me the above two possibilities make no difference,
but I find the second version (which I hated when I began programming)
to be somewhat more of a (self-made) standard nowadays.
But I do not think this particular case makes much of a difference.
kind regards,

Return in finally block hides exception in catch block

Hi,
if the line marked with "!!!" is commented out, the re-thrown exception is not seen by the caller (because of the return in the finally block). If the line is commented in, it works as I would expect. Is this is bug or a feature? I assume the return removes the call to troubleMaker() from the call stack - including the associated exception...
Christian Treber
[email protected]
public class ExceptionDemo extends TestCase
public void testException()
String lResult = "[not set]";
try
lResult = troubleMaker();
System.out.println("No exception from troubleMaker()");
} catch(Exception e)
System.out.println("Caught an exception from troubleMaker(): " + e);
System.out.println("Result: " + lResult);
public String troubleMaker()
boolean lErrorP = false;
try
if(6 > 5)
throw new RuntimeException("Initial exception");
return "normal";
} catch (RuntimeException e)
System.out.println("Caught runtime exception " + e);
lErrorP = true;
throw new RuntimeException("Exception within catch");
} finally
System.out.println("Finally! Error: " + lErrorP);
if(!lErrorP)
return "finally";

This is specified in the Java Language Specification, section 14.19.2 .
-- quote
If execution of the try block completes abruptly because of a throw of a value V, then there is a choice:
* If the run-time type of V is assignable to the parameter of any catch clause of the try statement, then the first (leftmost) such catch clause is selected. The value V is assigned to the parameter of the selected catch clause, and the Block of that catch clause is executed. Then there is a choice:
o If the catch block completes normally, then the finally block is executed. Then there is a choice:
+ If the finally block completes abruptly for any reason, then the try statement completes abruptly for the same reason.
-- end quote
"completing abruptly" (in this instance) means a throw or a return, as specified in section 14.1
Ok? It's not a bug, it's the defined behaviour of the language. And when you think about it, this behaviour gives you the option to do what you want in your finally block.

RAISERROR with Try/Catch does not exit after exception in catch block

I am trying to propogate an error from within my proc out to the caller.
In the attached example I have 2 sets of try catch blocks.
I raiserror in the first
catch the error and then raiserror again. (I expect to exit)
I do not expect :
to get to print 'post test'
to get to second try block.
but this does not exit, instead the code flows as per 2 runs.
I do not understand the reason for the flows, as it seems counterintuitive to be raising an error but then still print following exceptions. I cannot seem to find any references that explains this behaviour.
running tests together results
print '-------------------------------------------------------'
print 'test 15'
exec test_raiseerror 15
print '-------------------------------------------------------'
print 'test 16'
exec test_raiseerror 16
print '-------------------------------------------------------'
print 'test 17'
exec test_raiseerror 17
print '-------------------------------------------------------'
print 'test 18'
exec test_raiseerror 18
print '-------------------------------------------------------'
'RESULTS'
test 15
error number provided: 15
Msg 50000, Level 15, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 21
name hello 15
post test
15
Msg 50000, Level 15, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 37
name hello 2 15
post test2
test 16
error number provided: 16
Msg 50000, Level 16, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 21
name hello 16
post test
16
Msg 50000, Level 16, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 37
name hello 2 16
post test2
test 17
error number provided: 17
post test
17
post test2
test 18
error number provided: 18
post test
18
post test2
Msg 50000, Level 17, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 21
name hello 17
Msg 50000, Level 17, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 37
name hello 2 17
Msg 50000, Level 18, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 21
name hello 18
Msg 50000, Level 18, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 37
name hello 2 18
run tests seperately
exec test_raiseerror 15
error number provided: 15
RESULTS 15
Msg 50000, Level 15, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 21
name hello 15
post test
15
Msg 50000, Level 15, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 37
name hello 2 15
post test2
exec test_raiseerror 16
RESULTS 16
error number provided: 16
Msg 50000, Level 16, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 21
name hello 16
post test
16
Msg 50000, Level 16, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 37
name hello 2 16
post test2
exec test_raiseerror 17
RESULTS 17
error number provided: 17
post test
17
post test2
Msg 50000, Level 17, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 21
name hello 17
Msg 50000, Level 17, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 37
name hello 2 17
exec test_raiseerror 18
RESULTS 18
error number provided: 18
post test
18
post test2
Msg 50000, Level 18, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 21
name hello 18
Msg 50000, Level 18, State 1, Procedure test_raiseerror, Line 37
name hello 2 18
CODEBLOCK:
if object_id('test_raiseerror','P') is not null
drop proc test_raiseerror
go
create proc test_raiseerror(@id as int) as
begin
begin try
declare @name varchar(20)
select @name = 'hello'
raiserror('name %s %d',@id,1,@name,@id)
print 'next'
end try
begin catch
declare @errormessage nvarchar(4000)
declare @errornum int
select @errormessage = error_message()
, @errornum = error_severity()
print 'error number provided: ' + convert(varchar(2),@errornum)
raiserror(@errormessage, @errornum,1)
print 'post test'
end catch
begin try
select @name = 'hello 2'
raiserror('name %s %d', @id,1,@name, @id)
end try
begin catch
select @errormessage = error_message()
, @errornum = error_severity()
print @errornum
raiserror(@errormessage, @errornum,1)
print 'post test2'
end catch
end
go
sqlserver 2008 & 2008 R2

There is a Connect that describes a similiar complaint. But basically a raiserror inside a catch block does not terminate the procedure, it will continue with any additional code in the CATCH and FINALLY unless it hits a return statement.
http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/275308/have-raiserror-work-with-xact-abort

Return statement inside try block

what is wrong if i write code like as below...please explain me since i am new to java
class sample{
public String method(){
try{
String str="abc";
return abc;
catch(Exception e){}
}

veldhanas wrote:
return abc;In your code there is no varible declared as abc. It is a value assigned in str.
Suppose if the code in try statement throws exception the return statement is skipped and the
associated catch block will get executed. So your catch block must return a result of type String.... or throw another (or the same) exception.
In this case, since there's no way the code in the given "try" block can throw an exception, it would have been better to not even have a try/catch block in the first place.
And almost never just swallow exceptions like that (an empty catch block). There are only a few cases where it's ok to swallow them (such as in finally blocks where you're cleaning up resources which may throw exceptions while cleaning up, and you want to continue cleaning up and ignore those kinds of exceptions).

Trivial Catch block question

In a test harness I wanted to put some debugging output to System.out and keep one line per thread execution so I could read it more easily.
I have a try catch block, and in both sections my debugging prints out with System.out.print, so they should appear on the same line. The strange thing I have noticed is that when ever the catch block is entered the code prints on a new line and I dont know why.
Below is a snippet of code, its pretty simple but illustrates this:
try {
   System.out.println("starting test - ");
   //at this line the test code runs
   System.out.println("success");
} catch(Exception e) {
   System.out.println("fail");
}The output for a successful test is like:
starting test success
And for a fail:
starting test -
fail
I am just curious to know the answer, its like a new line character is output when the print statement is within the try catch block.

MarksmanKen wrote:
You want to use System.out.print not System.out.println
Notice the difference?
One automatically starts a new line and one just carrys on the current line.Wrong: One automatically ends the current line, while the other one does not!
A subtle difference, but important:
This code will print "foo" and "bar" on two separate lines:
System.out.println("foo");
System.out.print("bar");This code will print "foobar" on one line:
System.out.print("foo");
System.out.println("bar");

What is the most effective way to write Statement to catch and reverse errors during query excution?

Hello my friends:
I am wondering what is the most effective way to deal with errors, specifically in a
Stored Procedure.
I wrote something like this:
BEGIN TRY
BEGIN TRANSACTION
/*My statements goes in here*/
IF ERROR_NUMBER() = 0 -- Do I need this line?
COMMIT TRANSACTION;
END TRY
BEGIN CATCH
IF ERROR_NUMBER() > 0 --Do I need this line?
ROLLBACK TRANSACTION;
END CATCH;
It would make sense using the if Statement when attempting to log errors.
Just too many variations.
Thanks

Also read this great article
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/alexander_kuznetsov/archive/2009/05/13/your-try-block-may-fail-and-your-catch-block-may-be-bypassed.aspx
Best Regards,Uri Dimant SQL Server MVP,
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/uri_dimant/
MS SQL optimization: MS SQL Development and Optimization
MS SQL Consulting:
Large scale of database and data cleansing
Remote DBA Services:
Improves MS SQL Database Performance
SQL Server Integration Services:
Business Intelligence

Try block without a catch block

Hai!
I heared that java developers to make the java a familiear one used the syntax like c++. But i am surprised after seeing that
in java a try block is allowed with out a catch block if it has a finally block
1) i can't imagine such a situation. What is the use in doing so
2) Why java developers sacrificed the familierity in this issue.
clarify me.
Bye

in java a try block is allowed with out a catch block
if it has a finally block
1) i can't imagine such a situation. What is the use
in doing soWhen you want to do cleanup on the way out, regardless of whether the try block completes normally (executes its last statement) or abrubtly (return, exception thrown, break, continue).
2) Why java developers sacrificed the familierity in
this issue.I didn't sacrifce any familiarity. Keeping something the same as C++ for reasons of "familiarity" would be stupid. If it's just going to be the same as C++, why make a new laguage? You keep or don't keep features based on your assessment of their value in achieving the goals that you've set for your language. "Familiarity" was not likely an important goal for the creators of Java, and I'm glad for that.

Unreachable catch block???? what is this???

I have created a try-catch statement, I have also created a home made Invalid value exception class. I have also thrown the InvalidValueException in a calculate method in a seperate class. I am getting the error of unreachable catch block. Here is my code for this process. Please Help
private void runPayroll(List employees)
Collections.sort(employees, new PersonComparator());
// place the following code in a try-catch statement to check for the following errors
//- InvalidValue (the pay units must be a decimal number > 0)
try
double payRate = Double.parseDouble(jtfPayRate.getText());
catch (InvalidValueException ivEx)//THIS IS WHERE I AM GETTING MY ERROR
JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(this, "the pay units must be a decimal number > 0", "Error Message", JOptionPane.ERROR_MESSAGE);
return;
// loop through all of the employees in the collection
Iterator iterator = employees.iterator();
StringBuffer output = new StringBuffer("");
while (iterator.hasNext())
Employee employee = (Employee)iterator.next();
output.append( employee.toString() + "\n" );
//InvalidValueException class
public class InvalidValueException extends Exception
public InvalidValueException(double payUnit)
super(payUnit); //I SM GETTING THE ERROR The constructor Exception (double) is undefined PLEASE HELP
public String getLocalizedMessage()
return "Amount must be > 0";
//PayCheck class this is where I throw the exception
public abstract double calculate(double payUnit, double payRate)
throws InvalidValueException;
public void calculateTax() throws InvalidValueException
FICAOwed = grossPay * FICA;
federalOwed = grossPay * federalTax;
stateOwed = grossPay * stateTax;
}

Sorry did not mean to post twice. I made some changed from the responses, but Iwas not getting this error.
I have changed the code to this but now I am getting an error because the getText() returns a String. I need to check for a valid double could you help me with this.
try
double payRate = jtfPayRate.getText();
catch (InvalidValueException ivEx)//THIS IS WHERE I AM GETTING MY ERROR
JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(this, "the pay units must be a decimal number > 0", "Error Message", JOptionPane.ERROR_MESSAGE);
return;
}

Handling multiple exceptions with a single catch block

In the following code:
try{
catch (NumberFormatException a) {
catch (UserDefinedException b) {
The code for both catch blocks are identical. Is there no way I can combine these into one block?
For example, could I not do:
catch ( (NumberFormatException a) || (UserDefinedException b) ){
or anything similar?
I did think of:
try{
try{
catch (NumberFormatException a) {
throw new UserDefinedException("");
catch (UserDefinedException b){
but this just seems to be a waste of code. Any ideas?

I would use the fundamental way to combine identical sections of code--put the code in a new method:
    try {
    catch (NumberFormatException a) {
      myExceptionHandlingMethod(a);
    catch (UserDefinedException b) {
      myExceptionHandlingMethod(b);
private void myExceptionHandlingMethod(Throwable t) {
}

Can't find class because of try catch block ?!

Hello,
I'm using the JNI to use a java library from my c++ code.
JNI can't find the "Comverse10" class below, but when i put the try catch block in createMessage in comment, FindClass succeeds ?!
Unfortunatly i need the code inside the try block ;-)
I tried a few things, but none of them worked:
- let createMessage throw the exception (public void createMessage throws ElementAlreadyExistsException ), so there isn't a try catch block in createMessage => result: the same
- make a "wrapper" class Comverse that has a Comverse10 object as attribute and just calls the corresponding Comverse10.function. Result: Comvers could be found, but not constructed (NewObject failed).
Can someone tell me what is going on ?!
Thank you,
Pieter.
//Comverse10 class
public class Comverse10 {
MultimediaMessage message;
/** Creates a new instance of Comverse10 */
public Comverse10() {
public void createMessage() {
TextMediaElement text1 = new TextMediaElement("Pieter");
text1.setColor(Color.blue);
SimpleSlide slide1 = new SimpleSlide();
//if i put this try catch block in comment, it works ?!
try{
slide1.add(text1);
catch(com.comverse.mms.mmspade.api.ElementAlreadyExistsException e){}
MessageContent content = new MessageContent();
content.addSlide(slide1);
this.message = new MultimediaMessage();
message.setContent(content);
message.setSubject("Mijn subjectje");
for those of you who are intersted: here's my C++ code:
//creation of JVM
HRESULT Java::CreateJavaVMdll()
     HRESULT HRv = S_OK;
char classpath[1024];
     jint res;
     if(blog)     this->oDebugLog->Printf("CreateJavaVMdll()");
     strcpy(classpath,"-Djava.class.path="); /*This tells jvm that it is getting the class path*/
     strcat(classpath,getenv("PATH"));
     strcat(classpath,";D:\\Projects\\RingRing\\MMSComposer;C:\\Progra~1\\j2sdk1~1.1_0\\lib");     //;C:\\Comverse\\MMS_SDK\\SDK\\lib\\mail.jar;C:\\Comverse\\MMS_SDK\\SDK\\lib\\activation.jar;C:\\Comverse\\MMS_SDK\\SDK\\lib\\mmspade.jar
     //------Set Options for virtual machine
     options[0].optionString = "-Djava.compiler=NONE"; //JIT compiler
     options[1].optionString = classpath;                                        //CLASSPATH
     //------Set argument structure components
     vm_args.options = options;
     vm_args.nOptions = 2;
     vm_args.ignoreUnrecognized = JNI_TRUE;
     vm_args.version = JNI_VERSION_1_4;
     /* Win32 version */
     HINSTANCE hVM = LoadLibrary("C:\\Program Files\\j2sdk1.4.1_01\\jre\\bin\\client\\jvm.dll");
     if (hVM == NULL){
          if(blog) oDebugLog->Printf("Can't load jvm.dll");
          return E_FAIL;
     if(blog) oDebugLog->Printf("jvm.dll loaded\n");
     LPFNDLLFUNC1 func = (LPFNDLLFUNC1)GetProcAddress(hVM, "JNI_CreateJavaVM");
     if(!func){
          if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Can't get ProcAddress of JNI_CreateJavaVM");
          FreeLibrary(hVM);     hVM = NULL;
          return E_FAIL;
     if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("ProcAddress found");
     res = func(&jvm,(void**)&env,&vm_args);
     if (res < 0) {
if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Can't create JVM with JNI_CreateJavaVM %d\n",res);
return E_FAIL;
     if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("JVM created");
     return HRv;
//finding Comverse10 class:
HRESULT CALLAS MMSComposer::InitializeJNI(void)
     HRESULT HRv=E_FAIL;
     DWORD T=0;
     try
          if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("\nInitializeJNI()");
          bJVM = FALSE;
          jni = new Java(oDebugLog);
          if(jni->CreateJavaVMdll()!=S_OK){
               if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("CreateJavaVMdll() failed");
               return HRv;
          jclass jcls = jni->env->FindClass("Comverse10");
          if (jcls == 0) {
if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Can't find Comverse10 class");
               jclass jcls2 = jni->env->FindClass("test");
               if (jcls2 == 0) {
                    if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Can't find test class");
                    return HRv;
               if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("test class found %08x",jcls2);
return HRv;
          if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Comverse10 class found %08x",jcls);
          jmethodID mid = jni->env->GetMethodID(jcls , "<init>", "()V");
          if (mid == 0) {
               if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Can't find Comverse10() constructor");
return HRv;
          if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Comverse10() constructor found");
          jobject jobj = jni->env->NewObject(jcls,mid);
          if(jobj==0)
               if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Can't construct a Comverse10 object");
return HRv;
          if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Comverse10 object constucted");
          //Create Global reference, so java garbage collector won't delete it
          jni->jobj_comv = jni->env->NewGlobalRef(jobj);
          if(jni->jobj_comv==0)
               if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("Can't create global reference to Comverse10 object");
return HRv;
          if(blog)     oDebugLog->Printf("global reference to Comverse10 object %08x created",jni->jobj_comv);
          bJVM=TRUE;
          HRv=S_OK;
     }     catch( IDB * bgError ) { throw bgError->ErrorTrace("InitializeJNI::~InitializeJNI",HRv, 0, T); }
          catch(...) { throw IDB::NewErrorTrace("InitializeJNI::~InitializeJNI",HRv, 0, T ); }
          return HRv;

>
I would guess that the real problem is that that the
exception you are catching is not in the class path
that you are defining.Thanks jschell, that was indeed the case.
I don't have the docs, but I would guess that
FindClass() only returns null if an exception is
thrown. And you are not checking for the exception.
Which would tell you the problem.Ok, i'll remember that. But what with exceptions thrown in my java code, the documents say
// jthrowable ExceptionOccurred(JNIEnv *env);
// Determines if an exception is being thrown. The exception stays being thrown until either the native code calls ExceptionClear(), or the Java code handles the exception
so, what if the java code throws an exception and catches it, will i be able to see that in my c++ code with ExceptionOccurred ?
or
should the java method be declared to throw the exception (and not catch it inside the method)
Again, thank you for your help, it's greatly appreciated !

Exception Handling In BPEL By using Catch Blocks or Fault Policies Or Both

I have a confusion regarding
Exception handling :
When Should i go for 1)Catch Block (Remote , or binding ) in bpel for exception handling .
2)Fault Policy , Fault binding.xml
Currently iam using catch blocks , but even fault policy is good , but can i use both...
Currently in My bpel ,when any error occurs i have to send a error notification by Email .
Currently i have exposed the email service which shuts emails and write a file with errored Message.
Hence if any error i will catch i in a parent BPEL, i will just invoke the above email, service .
So anybody can help me by giving the suggestion how to go for the best approach
Edited by: anantwag on Mar 23, 2011 6:31 AM

Currently in My bpel ,when any error occurs i have to send a error notification by Email .
Currently i have exposed the email service which shuts emails and write a file with errored Message.Seeing your use case I will suggest you to use fault handling framework (fault policy). Fault handling framework should be used where you need generic error handling framework which handles all the faults occured in any composite component. Generally BPEL catch block should be used to propagate error info/fault back to the client/to fault handling framework or to consume an error
Regards,
Anuj

How to get the returned error messages in the Try/Catch block in DS 3.0?

A customer sent me the following questions when he tried to implement custom error handling in DS 3.0. I could only find the function "smtp_to" can return the last few lines of trace or error log file but this is not what he wants. Does anyone know the answers? Thanks!
I am trying to implement the Try/Catch for error handling, but I have
hard time to get the return the msg from DI, so I can write it to out
custom log table.
Can you tell me or point me to sample code that can do this, also, can
you tell me which tables capture these info if I want to query it from
DI system tables

Hi Larry,
In Data Services XI 3.1 (GAd yesterday) we made several enhancements for our Try/Catch blocks. One of them is the additional of functions to get details on the error that was catched :
- error_message() Returns the error message of the caught exception
- error_number() Returns the error number of the caught exception
- error_timestamp() Returns the timestamp of the caught exception.
- error_context() Returns the context of the caught exception. For example, "|Session Datapreview_job|Dataflow debug_DataFlow|Transform Debug"
In previous versions, the only thing you could do was in the mail_to function specify the number of lines you want to include from the error_log, which would send the error_log details in the body of the mail.
Thanks,
Ben.

If statements in catch blocks

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for