try..catch block

[Akash Singh]

A method can have mutiple try/catch block, but I always
use one try/catch block ( may be i have seen more code
of one try/catch block). Below i have two sample methods.

1. 
public void someMethod(){
   try {
         methodA();
   } catch (someExceptionA eA){
      // caught exception in methodA
   }
   try {
        methodB();
   }catch (someExceptionB eB){
         // caught exception in methodB
   }
}
2. 
public void someMethod(){
   try {
         methodA();
         methodB();
   } catch (someExceptionA eA){
      // caught exception in methodA
   } catch (someExceptionB eB){
       // caught exception in methodB
   }
}
  

Which one is appropriate ?
Regards,
Akash

[Chetan Mishra]

Hi Aakash,

Which one is appropriate ?

Both approches are fine. It all depends on how you want to handle the exceptions for methods.
You may use Case 1 type when you want to handle exception for methods individually... On the other hand case 2 is for combined or single exception handling for both methods.
So its just the matter of how you want to handle exceptions.

[Jim Yingst]

The important question here is: if methodA() throws an error, do you want to perform methodB() next, or not? In many cases the answer is no, because methodB() is written in such a way that it assumes methodA() has already been completed, and if that's not the case, methodB() may well be meaningless, or throw another error. So I'd say that option 2 is usually what you want. But there are times when you really do want methodB() to be performed even if methodA() fails - in this case, option 1 is preferred. I don't think we can say any more without knowing what methodA() and methodB() are supposed to do.

[Akash Singh]

Thank You Very Much, Jim and Chetan.
Regards,
Akash