Menu
If you have try catch within the loop it gets executed completely inspite of exceptions.
Without a try catch, you run the risk of encountering unhandled exceptions. Try catch statements aren't free in that they come with performance overhead. Like any language feature, try catches can be overused.
If you put the try/catch inside the loop, you'll keep looping after an exception. If you put it outside the loop you'll stop as soon as an exception is thrown.
Why you should care. Although this is sometimes unavailable, nesting try/catch blocks severely impacts the readability of the source code as it makes it difficult to understand which block will catch which exception.
The try-catch-finally construct creates a new variable in the current scope at runtime each time the catch clause is executed where the caught exception object is assigned to a variable.
Instead of using…
var object = ['foo', 'bar'], i;
for (i = 0, len = object.length; i <len; i++) {
try {
// do something that throws an exception
}
catch (e) {
// handle exception
}
}
Why to use this?
var object = ['foo', 'bar'], i;
try {
for (i = 0, len = object.length; i <len; i++) {
// do something that throws an exception
}
}
catch (e) {
// handle exception
}
Is there any case in which first option is better than the second one? When I write the code, I'm going with the feeling, but I was thinking about this recently, and I don't know what else to think. Which solution is better for what?
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