As I understand, the following 2 examples should do the same thing. Why is the 1st considered better?
I want to close my stream in the finally block, but it throws an IOException so it seems like I have to nest another try block in my finally block in order to close the stream. Is that the right way t
Is either one of these risky?Is one better?Or is it one of those things you print out and throw a dart at to decide?
I\'m wondering a bit about C++ try/catch/finally blocks. I\'ve seen these commands with two underscores like __try. But MVSC 2010 projects also run without 开发者_如何学Pythonthe underscores. So when
I know that finally blocks in deamon threads would not be executed. But my meticulous nature tries to understand why and what happens in JVM so special that it could not call the code under this block
I have the following piece of code: void func() { try { f1() } finally() { if (resource != null) resource.close();
I have the following code: class SampleClass : IDisposable { public void Dispose() { Console.WriteLine(\"Execute Dispose!\");
Inspired from the other topic, I wrote this code which simulates a finally block: #include <cassert>
What is the difference between try { // action A } catch(Exception e) { // acti开发者_如何学Goon B } finally {
I know that the C++/CLI equivalent to this C# code: using (SomeClass x = new SomeClass(foo)) { // ... } is this:
加载中,请稍侯......