C# transmit exception from class to Form - c#

How can I pass an error in the form of the class. When creating exemplar class.
Class:
class ThreadSafeLog
{
public ThreadSafeLog()
{
try
{
if (!File.Exists(Path_))
{
using (File.Create(Path_)) { }
}
}
catch(Exception e)
{
MessageBox.Show(e.Message);//error transmit exception to Form
}
}
}
Form:
ThreadSafeLog log = new ThreadSafeLog(
#"R:\project\ThreadSafeLog\ThreadSafeLogTest\ThreadSafeLogTest\bin\");

Why would ThreadSafeLog be concerned with what the form that uses it is doing? How is it even supposed to know it's being used by a form? Catch the exception in the form instead.
class ThreadSafeLog
{
public ThreadSafeLog()
{
if (!File.Exists(Path_))
{
using (File.Create(Path_)) { }
}
}
}
Form:
try
{
ThreadSafeLog log = new ThreadSafeLog(
#"R:\project\ThreadSafeLog\ThreadSafeLogTest\ThreadSafeLogTest\bin\");
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
MessageBox.Show(e.Message);
}
Though, as Adriano points out, you may also want to question why you're displaying internal error details directly to users.

I would not notify log's users about an error inside the logger itself. Log is, usually, a subsystem that it's good to consider error-safe and thread-safe or you'll make your code a messy. Imagine:
try
{
// Do something that may fail
}
catch (SomeException e)
{
try
{
logger.Log(e);
}
catch (IOException)
{
// Ooops, log doesn't work. What should I do?
// Should I display a MessageBox?
}
}
Your code will become quickly a messy (imagine to repeat the same check again and again for each trace log).
What I would do is to ignore (if possible) errors inside log function and to take another action instead. How? Just add an event to your log class (code is an example not for production!):
class Logger
{
public event EventHandler<LogErrorEventArgs> Error;
public void Log(Exception e)
{
try
{
// Try to write log somewhere...
}
catch (IOException internalException)
{
EventHandler<LogErrorEventArgs> error = Error;
if (error != null)
error(this, new LogErrorEventArgs(e, internalException);
}
}
}
In this way unhandled errors inside logger will go unnoticed (if this is applicable) or they may be handled (in the way it's appropriate, if there is a way). For example:
Logger logger = new Logger();
logger.Error += delegate(object sender, LogErrorEventArgs e)
{
if (SystemInformation.UserInteractive)
MessageBox.Show(e.ExceptionToLog.Message);
};
You may attach multiple handlers too (for example to log to Windows Log and notify user is session is interactive). When you use log you won't be aware it may fail (so you won't have to fill your code with try/catch everywhere) but if needed you may still be notified and errors inside log will be handled in a consistent manner.
Now let's rewrite the code in our first example like this:
try
{
// Do something that may fail
}
catch (SomeException e)
{
logger.Log(e);
}
Straight, right? I assumed logger will always write an exception (somehow) but it's easy to change code to handle a raw String instead. I omitted code for LogErrorEventArgs because pretty obvious anyway it may look like this:
class LogErrorEventArgs : EventArgs
{
public LogErrorEventArgs(
Exception exceptionToLog,
Exception internalLoggerException)
{
ExceptionToLog = exceptionToLog;
InternalLoggerException = internalLoggerException;
}
public Exception ExceptionToLog
{
get;
set;
}
public Exception InternalLoggerException
{
get;
set;
}
}

Related

How do I handle a exception in a library in C#

When I run the code it goes to the throw statement on the catch part rather at the place where the user calls it even after re-throwing.If i didn't catch and rethrow it goes into the function.How to prevent getting into the class library code and show the exception at the user level and prevent the user to view the library code.
public void Services(string hostName)
{
try
{
if (hostName!=null)
{
}
else
{
FunctionThatThrowException(hostName);
}
}
catch(Exception e)
{
throw;
}
}

How to make exception handler using events

I have dll Scripting. In that dll I have class named Scripter. In Scripter class i call some methods which loads data from MySQL database (LoadTables()). In that functions which loads data from MySQL database exception could happen. I want to be able, later in my app where I use Scripting.dll, to do something like this:
Scrpter sc = new Scripter();
sc.OnError += ErrorOccured;
And want to have function ErrorOcured in my app which will be like:
private void ErrorOccured(Exception exception)
{...}
What I need to have in Scripter class, and how should I pass exception in catch block in LoadTables so I could later use ErrorOcured() to see what happend wrong?
As Picoh and Zoltan commented on your question, you can easily wrap method calls to Scripter methods in try/catch block. But, if you want to use event (with custom args), you can do something like this:
//your class
public class Scripter
{
public Scripter()
{
}
//public event with custom event args
public EventHandler<ScripterErrorEventArgs> OnError;
//just for test
public void RaiseError()
{
//error which is caught here
Exception ex = new Exception("something happened");
OnError?.Invoke(this, new ScripterErrorEventArgs(ex));
}
}
//class for custom event args. add your own other properties as needed
public class ScripterErrorEventArgs : EventArgs
{
public ScripterErrorEventArgs()
{
}
public ScripterErrorEventArgs(Exception ex)
{
this.Exception = ex;
}
public Exception Exception { get; set; }
}
//usage
public void someMethod()
{
Scripter s = new Scripter();
s.OnError += new EventHandler<ScripterErrorEventArgs>(LogError)
s.RaiseError();
}
private void LogError(object sender, ScripterErrorEventArgs e)
{
//your code here
}
You could try to modify your Scripter class like this
class Scripter
{
public event EventHandler<Exception> ErrorOcurred;
protected virtual void OnErrorOcurred(Exception e)=>ErrorOcurred?.Invoke(this, e);
public void ThrowsException()
{
try
{
throw new Exception("Throws exception");
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
OnErrorOcurred(ex);
}
}
}
This way you can subscribe to ErrorOcurred and receive notifications about exceptions. You must call OnErrorOcurred in every place you catch an exception
Hope this helps

Stop execution of all methods from child method

I am working with a few methods that are called from within other methods, but need to stop processing both methods if an event occurs in the one called from the parent. An example of what I am doing in code would be this:
private void parentMethod()
{
//Do work here
childMethod();
//Do more work here
}
private void childMethod()
{
//Do work (not child labor)
using (var form = new choice(myList))
{
var result = form.ShowDialog();
if (result == DialogResult.OK)
{
int val = form.listIndex;//values preserved after close
//Do something here with these values
string server = myList2[val - 1];
MyList.Clear();
MyList.Add(server);
}
else
{
Exception e = new Exception("Dialog force closed.",null);
throw e;
}
}
So as you can see here, I tried creating an exception to throw; however, because there are number of other methods getting called from the parent method which also can throw exceptions, but can allow the rest of the code to execute, and the parent method in this example is being called from another method that needs to be stopped as well, how do you stop the execution of multiple methods from within a child method, other that doing Application.Close()?
You need to be more specific in your exception catching. In general, a bare catch is bad practice anywhere except the very top level, as is catch (Exception e) or similar. You should determine which exceptions a method can throw, and then only catch those. Other exceptions will then be passed back up the call stack.
For instance, if you have a method A() that might throw an InvalidOperationException, B() that might throw an ArgumentOutOfRangeException or ArgumentNullException, and C() that might throw an AccessViolationException, your code should look like
public int Main()
{
try
{
try
{
A()
}
catch(InvalidOperationException e)
{
//handle
}
try
{
B()
}
catch(ArgumentOutOfRangeException e)
{
//handle
}
catch(ArgumentNullException e)
{
//handle
}
try
{
C()
}
catch(AccessViolationException e)
{
//handle
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
//handle all other exceptions
}
}
Now, if any method out of A,B, and C throws an exception you're not expecting, it will be handled by the final catch block.
If you really must have an exception that can only be handled at the top level, it might be a good idea to create your own Exception class:
class MyApplicationException : Exception { }
Then, as long as you never use catch (Exception) anywhere other than at the top level, you will be fine.

Idiomatic way to throw exceptions to a delegate

I have a monitor class which monitors a device and reports if that device successfully receives usable data. This can happen anytime.
A client creates its own monitor by passing delegates, starts it and waits for either the successfully read data or a kind of domain specific exception type (one base exception type)
What would be the idiomatic way of throwing subtypes of the base exception type and enable the client to respond to each subtype individually?
public class MyMonitor
{
private SuccessHandler _successHandler;
private ErrorHandler _errorHandler;
public delegate void SuccessHandler(MyDTO result);
public delegate void ErrorHandler(MyBaseException exception);
public MyMonitor(SuccessHandler successHandler, ErrorHandler errorHandler) {
_successHandler = successHandler;
_errorHandler = errorHandler;
}
public void start() {
try {
_successHandler(new MyDTP().doSomethingRisky());
} catch(Exception e) {
_errorHandler(e);
}
}
}
public class Client {
static void Main(string[] args) {
MyMonitor monitor = new MyMonitor(new MyMonitor.SuccessHandler(handleSuccess), new MyMonitor.ErrorHandler(handleException));
monitor.start();
}
static void handleSuccess(MyDTO result) {
// do something with result
}
static void handleException(MyBaseException e) {
try {
throw e;
} catch(UserException mbe) {
// present message to user
} catch(DataNotFoundException se) {
// log error and show generic error message
} catch(UnexpectedException ue) {
// log error and try to hide it from the user
}
}
}
So, why don't you handle the exceptions in your main instead of the monitor-class?
If that isn't an option, you have (at least) two alternatives:
static void handleException(MyBaseException e)
{
if (e is UserException)
{
// present message to user
}
else if (e is DataNotFoundException)
{
// log error and show generic error message
}
elseif (e is UnexpectedException)
{
// log error and try to hide it from the user
}
else
{
// might want to rethrow the exception, do a general handling,...
}
}
That way you don't have to rethrow the exception, just to catch it again.
But this can get ugly if you have many subtypes to handle and here is where multidispatch comes in.
static void HandleException(MyBaseException e)
{
HandleSubException((dynamic)e);
}
static void HandleSubException(MyBaseException e)
{
// might want to rethrow the exception, do a general handling,...
}
static void HandleSubException(DataNotFoundExceptione)
{
// log error and show generic error message
}
static void HandleSubException(UnexpectedException e)
{
// log error and try to hide it from the user
}
static void HandleSubException(UserExceptione)
{
// present message to user
}
Now you can tend to each exception in its own method and is much easier to read and maintain.
Having said that, I'm not entirely sure if this falls under best practice.

ServiceBase.Run, why can't I catch it's exceptions, or react to them in some other way?

I'm calling the following from my entry point static main method:
try { ServiceBase.Run(new MonitorSer()); }
catch (Exception ex) { Console.WriteLine(ex.Message + Process.GetCurrentProcess().MainModule.FileName); }
MonitorSer is an instance of:
class MonitorSer : ServiceBase {
and the entry main method is a member of my class:
[RunInstaller(true)]
public class WindowsServiceInstaller : Installer {
I've had good results catching exceptions for debugging but sometimes they seem to find their own way around my traps, as in this case.
I get a windows box flash up telling me I need to install using installutil when what I really want is to find the name of this process and call it again with the -i switch which I have wired up to make it install intself (credit to those here who contributed/recycled that code).
What makes this more frustrating is that if I set breakpoints upto (or on) the call to ServiceBase.Run, it will fail silently and I am left with the blinking console.
UPDATE
static void Install(bool undo, string[] args)
{
try
{
Console.WriteLine(undo ? "uninstalling" : "installing");
using (AssemblyInstaller inst = new AssemblyInstaller(typeof(MonitorSer).Assembly, args))
{
IDictionary state = new Hashtable();
inst.UseNewContext = true;
try
{
if (undo) inst.Uninstall(state);
else
{
inst.Install(state);
inst.Commit(state);
}
}
catch
{
try
{
inst.Rollback(state);
}
catch { }
throw;
}
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Console.Error.WriteLine(ex.Message);
}
}
I clumped the entry point here so I could call the above function, I'll try moving that to another class and setting the entry point there, but I know I can make this entry point (that you, Dmitry, deny) work by calling itself with the appropriate argument to install- which only the BaseService class can do- correct me if I am wrong.
[RunInstaller(true)]
public class WindowsServiceInstaller : Installer
Is not your entry point. This will get called once when you install your service using InstallUtil.exe. Entry point can be specified in the project properties and it usually defaults to Program.Main. You should not be starting your service from Installer class.
CLR will let you know of unhandled exceptions if you subscribe to this event:
static void Main() {
...
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException
+= CurrentDomain_UnhandledException;
...
}
private static void CurrentDomain_UnhandledException(
Object sender,
UnhandledExceptionEventArgs e) {
if (e != null && e.ExceptionObject != null) {
// log exception:
}
}
This event provides notification of uncaught exceptions. It allows the
application to log information about the exception before the system
default handler reports the exception to the user and terminates the application
...
Starting with the .NET Framework version 4, this event is not raised
for exceptions that corrupt the state of the process, such as stack
overflows or access violations, unless the event handler is
security-critical and has the
HandleProcessCorruptedStateExceptionsAttribute attribute.
application.
Another place where you might want to log exceptions in windows service (because .NET/SCM will swallow startup exceptions):
protected override void OnStart(String[] args) {
try {
} catch(Exception e) {
// log exception:
throw;
}
}

Categories

Resources