[ACCEPTED]-What is bad in "When Others Then Null" in PL/SQL?-plsql
The problem is, that you are catching all 2 exceptions, and then ignoring them. You'll 1 never know when something went wrong.
There's nothing wrong with this snippet 11 of code if you don't want the pl/sql block's 10 exception to propagate any further for example. If 9 you do it on purpose, it's not bad code 8 or a mistake. That's the catch all in pl/sql. And 7 there might be situations in code where 6 you have nested BEGIN/EXCEPTION/END blocks 5 and one might not want the transaction to 4 fail just if a particular cross section 3 of code fails. You can't state it's bad 2 coding if you do it intentionally for whatever 1 reason/requirement.
BEGIN --something important here --something even more important here BEGIN --something secondary goes here but not important enough to stop the process or --log a message about it either --maybe send an informative email to the support group or --insert a log message when debugging the process or --the list could go on and on here EXCEPTION --I don't care if this block fails, absorbing all errors regardless of type WHEN OTHERS THEN NULL; END; -- something super important here, must happen EXCEPTION WHEN NO_DATA_FOUND THEN -- do something useful for this exception WHEN OTHERS THEN -- do something by default if we don't expect this error END;
More Related questions