Menu
I am trying to improve my Ruby skills by catching exceptions. I want to know if it is common to reraise the same kind of exception when you have several method calls. So, would the following code make sense? Is it ok to reraise the same kind of exception, or should I not catch it on the process method?
class Logo def process begin @processed_logo = LogoProcessor::create_image(self.src) rescue CustomException raise CustomException end end end module LogoProcessor def self.create_image raise CustomException if some_condition end end 
371
Ruby also provides a separate class for an exception that is known as an Exception class which contains different types of methods. The code in which an exception is raised, is enclosed between the begin/end block, so you can use a rescue clause to handle this type of exception.
A raised exception can be rescued to prevent it from crashing your application once it reaches the top of the call stack. In Ruby, we use the rescue keyword for that. When rescuing an exception in Ruby, you can specify a specific error class that should be rescued from.
When you raise an exception in Ruby, the world stops and your program starts to shut down. If nothing stops the process, your program will eventually exit with an error message.
Ruby actually gives you the power to manually raise exceptions yourself by calling Kernel#raise. This allows you to choose what type of exception to raise and even set your own error message. If you do not specify what type of exception to raise, Ruby will default to RuntimeError (a subclass of StandardError ).
Sometimes we just want to know an error happened, without having to actually handle the error.
It is often the case that the one responsible for handling errors is user of the object: the caller. What if we are interested in the error, but don't want to assume that responsibility? We rescue the error, do whatever we need to do and then propagate the signal up the stack as if nothing had happened.
For example, what if we wanted to log the error message and then let the caller deal with it?
begin this_will_fail! rescue Failure => error log.error error.message raise end Calling raise without any arguments will raise the last error. In our case, we are re-raising error.
In the example you presented in your question, re-raising the error is simply not necessary. You could simply let it propagate up the stack naturally. The only difference in your example is you're creating a new error object and raising it instead of re-raising the last one.
154
This will raise the same type of error as the original, but you can customize the message.
rescue StandardError => e raise e.class, "Message: #{e.message}" If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
