Is there a situation when it's appropriate to use empty catch block?

c# .net exception-handling try-catch catch-block
bniwredyc picture bniwredyc · Jan 14, 2011 · Viewed 9.5k times · Source

Possible Duplicates:
Why are empty catch blocks a bad idea?
Is there any valid reason to ever ignore a caught exception

Do you know any situations when an empty catch block is not the absolute evil?

try
{
    ...
    // What and When?
    ...
}
catch { }

Answer

as-cii picture as-cii · Jan 14, 2011

There are a lot of questions on this, try to look at:

Why are empty catch blocks a bad idea?

From that post's accepted answer:

Usually empty try-catch is a bad idea because you are silently swallowing an error condition and then continuing execution. Occasionally this may be the right thing to do, but often it's a sign that a developer saw an exception, didn't know what to do about it, and so used an empty catch to silence the problem.

It's the programming equivalent of putting black tape over an engine warning light.

Related questions

How using try catch for exception handling is best practice

while maintaining my colleague's code from even someone who claims to be a senior developer, I often see the following code: try { //do something } catch { //Do nothing } or sometimes they write logging information to log files like following try catch …

Read More
Why is try {...} finally {...} good; try {...} catch{} bad?

I have seen people say that it is bad form to use catch with no arguments, especially if that catch doesn't do anything: StreamReader reader=new StreamReader("myfile.txt"); try { int i = 5 / 0; } catch // No args, so it will catch any …

Read More
Will code in a Finally statement fire if I return a value in a Try block?

I'm reviewing some code for a friend and say that he was using a return statement inside of a try-finally block. Does the code in the Finally section still fire even though the rest of the try block doesn't? Example: …

Read More