C#: Equivalent of the python try/catch/else block

Question

In Python, there is this useful exception handling code:

try:
    # Code that could raise an exception
except Exception:
    # Exception handling
else:
    # Code to execute if the try block DID NOT fail

I think it's useful to be able to separate the code that could raise and exception from your normal code. In Python, this was possible as shown above, however I can't find anything like it in C#.

Assuming the feature or one like it doesn't exist, is it standard practice to put normal code in the try block or after the catch block?

The reason I ask is because I have the following code:

if (!IsReadOnly)
{
    T newobj;
    try
    {
        newobj = DataPortal.Update<T>(this);

        List<string> keys = new List<string>(BasicProperties.Keys);
        foreach (string key in keys)
        {
            BasicProperties[key] = newobj.BasicProperties[key];
        }
    }
    catch (DataPortalException)
    {
        // TODO: Implement DataPortal.Update<T>() recovery mechanism
    }
}

Which requires the normal code to be in the try block because otherwise if an exception was raised and subsequently handled, newobj would be unassigned, but it feels quite unnatural to have this much code in the try block which is unrelated to the DataPortalException. What to do?

Thanks

Answer 1

You could do something like this:

if (!IsReadOnly)
{
    T newobj = null;
    try
    {
        newobj = DataPortal.Update<T>(this);    
    }
    catch (DataPortalException)
    {
        // TODO: Implement DataPortal.Update<T>() recovery mechanism
    }
    if (newobj != null)
    {
        List<string> keys = new List<string>(BasicProperties.Keys);
        foreach (string key in keys)
        {
            BasicProperties[key] = newobj.BasicProperties[key];
        }
    }
}

Answer 2

that would be the empty statement like hits

try 
{ 
    somethingThatCanThrow(); 
} 
catch(Exception ex) 
{ 
    LogException(ex); 
    return;
} 
ContinueFlow();

Answer 3

I would prefer to see the rest of the code outside the try/catch so it is clear where the exception you are trying to catch is coming from and that you don't accidentally catch an exception that you weren't trying to catch.

I think the closest equivalent to the Python try/catch/else is to use a local boolean variable to remember whether or not an exception was thrown.

bool success;

try
{
    foo();
    success = true;
}
catch (MyException)
{
    recover();
    success = false;
}

if (success)
{
    bar();
}

But if you are doing this, I'd ask why you don't either fully recover from the exception so that you can continue as if there had been success, or else fully abort by returning an error code or even just letting the exception propagate to the caller.

Answer 4

C# does not have such a concept, so you are just left with three options,

• put the else code inside the try.
• put the else code outside the try catch block, use a local variable to indicate success or failure, and an if block around your else code.
• put the else code in the finally block, use a local variable to indicate success or failure, and an if block arount you else code.

Answer 5

Just put your "else" block before the catch. Then, it will only execute if code execution reaches that point:

try
{
    fee();
    fi();
    foe();
    fum();

    /// put your "else" stuff here. 
    /// It will only be executed if fee-fi-foe-fum did not fail.
}
catch(Exception e)
{
    // handle exception
}

Given that, I fail to see the use of try..catch...else unless there's something vital missing from the OP's description.

Answer 6

Allow me to repeat an idea from a similar StackOverflow question. You cannot do this directly, but you can write a method that encapsulates the behavior you need. Look at the original question to see how to implement the method (if you're not familiar with lambda expressions and Func delegates). The usage could look like this:

TryExceptRaise(() => { 
    // code that can throw exception
  }, (Exception e) => { 
    // code to run in case of an exception
    return (...); 
  }, () => {
    // code to run if there is no exception
    return (...);
  });

Answer 7

Barbaric solution: create an Else class derived from Exception, throw an instance of it at the end of the try block, and use catch (Else) {...} to handle the other stuff.

I feel so dirty.

Answer 8

This will might get downvoted but doesn't c# have goto(note I have almost no c# knowledge so I have no idea if this works).

what about something like

try 
{ 
...
} 
catch(Exception ex) 
{ 
...
goto Jump_past_tryelse
} 
...//Code to execute if the try block DID NOT fail

Jump_past_tryelse:
...