I'm going to agree that this is probably a good practice to try and
enforce, maybe we should add it to HACKING?
-Kevin Kubasik
On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 21:42 +0200, Max wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Thanks for the quick replies...
>
> Am Dienstag, den 24.10.2006, 20:16 +0200 schrieb Daniel Naber:
> > On Tuesday 24 October 2006 15:44, Max wrote:
> >
> > > Is there any reason for always putting the e or the ex variables there
> > > even though they are not used afterwards?
> >
> > The better question might be: why isn't it used? Even if you don't know
> > what to do and just log the exception it should print the exact cause of
> > the problem.
>
> Quite often you know why a exception will probably be thrown and that it
> does not indicate a problem. I was not explaining my self clear enough.
> i was referring to some cases in beagle like this one
> (BeagleClient/Indexable.cs, Line 287 following):
>
> try {
> File.Delete (contentUri.LocalPath);
> } catch (Exception ex)
> {
> // It might be gone already, so catch the exception.
> }
>
> Imho it would be best to catch that exception like this:
> } catch (FileNotFoundException)
> {
> // It might be gone already, so catch the exception.
> }
>
> This would also avoid catching other exceptions, that indicate a
> different problem.
>
>
> Max
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dashboard-hackers mailing list
> Dashboard-hackers gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dashboard-hackers
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part