Consider the following C# code structure (S0-S3 are placeholders for arbitrary code blocks):
try
{
S0;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
S1;
}
finally
{
S2;
}
S3;
In the case that S1 throws an exception inside the catch handler, S2 inside the finally will still execute (but S3 will not).
Question
Assuming that S1 cannot throw, is there any point in having S2 inside a finally block, rather than having it outside the try/catch/finally, just before S3?
Example
try
{
// Do something that might throw
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// Save the exception to re-throw later
// NB: This statement cannot throw an exception!
this.cachedException = ex;
}
finally
{
S2;
}
S3;
Is there any point in having the finally block? Would the following code not be equivalent (under the strict assumption that what's inside the catch block cannot throw):
try
{
// Do something that might throw
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// Save the exception to re-throw later
// NB: This statement cannot throw an exception!
this.cachedException = ex;
}
// No finally block needed (?)
S2;
S3;
Secondary Question
Update: If it is accepted that the two code blocks above are equivalent (under the assumptions stated) then, taking into account the feedback on code clarity in the answers, would it be preferrable (and equivalent) to combine S2 and S3 inside the finally block?
try
{
// Do something that might throw
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// Save the exception to re-throw later
// NB: This statement cannot throw an exception!
this.cachedException = ex;
}
finally
{
S2; // Put S2 and S3 together inside the `finally` block to guard against
S3; // future changes in the `catch` filter, or handling code.
}