I created a new C++/WinRT UWP project (type: Blank App (C++/WinRT)) and modified the default App() constructor to look like this:
App::App()
{
InitializeComponent();
Suspending({ this, &App::OnSuspending });
UnhandledException([this](IInspectable const&, UnhandledExceptionEventArgs const& e)
{
// just debug code, I want to place logging here in the actual program
Windows::UI::Popups::MessageDialog dialog(L"Hello World", L"Hello World");
dialog.ShowAsync();
});
}
and I thought above code would always be invoked whenever an exception is thrown that is unhandled by my code.
I further modified the OnLaunched code to always throw an exception, e.g.
void App::OnLaunched(LaunchActivatedEventArgs const& e)
{
Frame rootFrame{ nullptr };
rootFrame.GoForward(); // force exception
...
but the exception handler from the App constructor is not invoked.
What am I doing wrong?
Is there a way to always execute some specific code (e.g. logging) when an uncaught exception is thrown?
Related
Below is the sample code I'm using to understand exception handling in completablefuture in java8.
If we make use of exceptionally method as per doc,
exceptionally method catches even runtime exception as well and proceeds to last block in the pipeline.
if we don't use exceptionally method then, it justs prints running and exits.
Correct me if my understanding isn't correct.
Question is Lets say if i want to throw runtime exception and want application to stop. Basically if i throw Runtime exception , it shouldn't proceed to next block in pipeline. How should i do that. Any pointers are helpful.
public static void main(String[] args) {
final CompletableFuture<String> retrieveName = CompletableFuture.supplyAsync(() -> {
System.out.println("running");
int i = 0;
if(i == 0) {
throw new RuntimeException("ding");
}
return "test";
}).exceptionally(it -> {
System.out.println(it.getMessage());
return "empty";
}).thenApply(it -> {
System.out.println("last block" + it);
return "dummy";
});
}
Try this:
public static void main(String[] args) {
try {
final CompletableFuture<String> retrieveName = CompletableFuture.supplyAsync(() -> {
System.out.println("running");
int i = 0;
if (i == 0) {
throw new RuntimeException("ding");
}
return "test";
}).exceptionally(it -> {
if (it.getMessage().contains("ding")) {
throw (RuntimeException) it;
}
System.out.println(it.getMessage());
return "empty";
}).thenApply(it -> {
System.out.println("last block" + it);
return "dummy";
});
retrieveName.join();
} catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println("main() exception, cause=" + e.getCause());
}
}
This is the output:
running
main() exception, cause=java.lang.RuntimeException: ding
I made 3 small changes to your code:
Wrapped it all in a try-catch
Threw a RuntimeException in exceptionally() for the "ding" exception.
Added a call to retrieveName.join(). From the Javadoc for CompletableFuture.join():
public T join​()
Returns the result value when complete, or throws an (unchecked) exception if completed exceptionally.
Update based on OP feedback ------->
Lets say if i want to throw runtime exception and want application to
stop. Basically if i throw Runtime exception , it shouldn't proceed to
next block in pipeline. How should i do that.
You can achieve what you want with just 2 changes to your code:
[1] Completely remove the exceptionally() callback so the CompletableFuture (CF) terminates with an exception. In exceptionally() in the OP code the exception was being swallowed rather than rethrown, and returning a CF, so the thenApply() method was still performed.
[2] Add a call to retrieveName.join() at the end of main(). This is a blocking call, but since the thread had terminated with an exception that 's not really relevant for the sample code. The join() method will extract the thrown RunTimeException and re-throw it, wrapped in a CompletionException.
Here's your modified code:
public static void main(String[] args) {
final CompletableFuture<String> retrieveName = CompletableFuture.supplyAsync(() -> {
System.out.println("running");
int i = 0;
if(i == 0) {
throw new RuntimeException("ding");
}
return "test";
}).thenApply(it -> {
System.out.println("last block" + it);
return "dummy";
});
retrieveName.join();
}
Notes:
This is not how to do things in Production. The blocking call from join() was not a problem here, but could be for a long running CF. But you obviously can't extract the exception from the CF until it is complete, so it makes sense that the join() call blocks.
Always bear in mind that main() is not running in the same thread(s) as the CF.
An alternative approach (if viable) might be to handle all the necessary post-exception actions (logging, etc,) within exceptionally() and then terminate normally with a suitable return value (e.g. "Exception handled!") rather than propagating the exception.
You can check whether the CF is still running by calling the non-blocking isDone() method. You can also check whether the CF ended with an exception (isCompletedExceptionally()) or was cancelled(isCancelled​()).
I'm using rxAndroid.
I've read many documents, but still not found the solution, and maybe I missed it,
so please give me a guide.
Here I created an observable that might throw an exception in subscribe method.
return Observable.create(new ObservableOnSubscribe<Project>() {
#Override
public void subscribe(#NonNull ObservableEmitter<Project> e) throws Exception {
e.onNext(projectRepository.readDetails(project.getId()));
e.onComplete();
}
});
I use repository pattern to get the project details,
but the problem is all of the repository methods might throw an exception,
projectRepository.readDetails(project.getId())
And I couldn't find anyway to handle the exception throwed in the method subscibe(), Observer's onError() will not get any notification of it.
Thanks.
When creating an observable manually, you have to catch any exception and pass them to the onError() manually:
return Observable.create(new ObservableOnSubscribe<Project>() {
#Override
public void subscribe(#NonNull ObservableEmitter<Project> e) throws Exception {
try {
e.onNext(projectRepository.readDetails(project.getId()));
e.onComplete();
}
catch (Exception ex) {
e.onError(ex);
}
}
});
Alternatively you should be able to use fromCallable() to avoid having to create the observable manually:
Observable.fromCallable(() -> projectRepository.readDetails(project.getId()));
This will signal onError() if the call should fail.
I have the following method:
public Object method(){
try
{
privatevoidmethod1();
privatevoidmethod2();
}
catch(Exception e)
{
Log.debug(e);
}
return object;
}
How do I force the exception so I can test the debug call?
Leaving aside how you'd test the debug call, you'd normally trigger an exception by providing suitable inputs such that an exception would be created/thrown. If that's not suitable, the alternative is to provide a substitute (mocked) component that has been configured/written to throw an exception e.g.
public MyClass(MyInjectedComponent component) {
this.component = component;
}
and you'd provide for your test an implementation of MyInjectedComponent that will throw an exception (for testing purposes). The approach of injecting components into other components is called dependency injection and worth investigating.
I'd normally use a mocking framework for this (e.g. Mockito or similar). However a trivial implementation of the above could be:
public class MyImplementationForTesting extends MyInjectedComponent {
public void method() throws Exception {
throw new Exception();
}
}
I have a method with a handled exception:
public boolean exampleMethod(){
try{
Integer temp=null;
temp.equals(null);
return
}catch(Exception e){
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
I want to test it
public void test_exampleMethod(){}
I have tried
#Rule
public ExpectedException expectedException=ExpectedException.none();
public void test_exampleMethod(){
expectedException.expect(JsonParseException.class);
exampleMethod();
}
but that doesnt work because the exception is handled inside.
I also tried
#Test(expected=JsonParseException.class)
but same issue...the exception is handled
I know that I can just do
assertTrue(if(exampleMethod()))
but it will still print the stack trace to the log. I would prefer clean logs...Any suggestions?
You cannot test what a method is doing internally. This is completely hidden (unless there are side effects, that are visible outside).
The test can check that for a specific input the method returns a expected output. But you can not check, how this is done. So you have no way to detect if there was a exception that you have handled.
So: either don't handle the exception (let the test catch the exception), or return a special value that tells you about the exception.
Anyway, I hope your real exception handling is more sensible than in your example.
If the method does not throw an exception you cannot expect to get one!
Below an example how write a Junit Test for a method that throws an Exception:
class Parser {
public void parseValue(String number) {
return Integer.parseInt(number);
}
}
Normal test case
public void testParseValueOK() {
Parser parser = new Parser();
assertTrue(23, parser.parseValue("23"));
}
Test case for exception
public void testParseValueException() {
Parser parser = new Parser();
try {
int value = parser.parseValue("notANumber");
fail("Expected a NumberFormatException");
} catch (NumberFormatException ex) {
// as expected got exception
}
}
In my grails app I have a custom InvalidTokenException as follows:
class InvalidTokenException extends Exception{
public InvalidTokenException() {}
public InvalidTokenException(String message)
{
super(message);
}
}
which I am throwing in my service as follows:
throw new InvalidTokenException("Invalid token : '${word}'")
which I am catching in my controller and rendering to the client as follows:
catch(e)
{
//send the exception to the client for rendering an error message.
render(status: 400, text: e)
return false //stops further execution
}
Though I want to be strip back the message that it only contains the text "Invalid token : word" rather than "Exception uk.co.litecollab.exceptions.InvalidTokenException Invalid token : word"
Any ideas how to do this?
Change it to render(status: 400, text: e.message) since you're currently taking advantage of the auto-conversion of e to a String, which calls the toString() method. Calling getMessage() directly makes more sense in general and does what you need here.