http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660Yes, ex.ToString() http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment14http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment14Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:19:34 GMTIs there a way to set up log4net to traverse all the innerexception, dumping everything? http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment13http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment13Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:15:37 GMTIn the little in house app at work, I use the Microsoft Exception Message Box from SQL Server as my last-minute-throw-up-a-dialog-before-dying dialog for uncaught exceptions. It's pretty hot because it unwinds the exceptions, lets you peruse the dictionary, and most importantly has a "copy to clipboard" that my coworkers use to send the complete error. Check it out at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=DF0BA5AA-B4BD-4705-AA0A-B477BA72A9CB&displaylang=en. It's part of the SQL Server feature pack because it's the same dialog Management Studio Express uses, but it's just a DLL that has no dependency on SQL Server. For our Web site, we use log4net, and I wrote a quick and dirty renderer that would unwind the entire exception in the server logs: http://piasecki.name/InnerExceptionRenderer.cs It doesn't do any fancy reflection, but it helps a lot because as Luke said, it's nice to be able to say "oh, I know exactly what caused that." http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment12http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment12Fri, 07 Dec 2007 16:38:02 GMTWhat about making the exception serializable? I think that's how Service Trace Viewer logs exceptions. http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment11http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment11Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:44:58 GMTI agree and practice exactly as Luke and Gian. Dump wads of stuff into your exception handler during your initial coding, and also dump everything to logs from day one, and debugging becomes more of an exercise of pin the tail on the donkey. The donkey being how to fix the issue, not what caused the issue. http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment10http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment10Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:18:34 GMTShould ex.ToString() reveal sensitive information? http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment9http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment9Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:02:23 GMTLuke, Because there _is_ a standard way to output all the required information. ex.ToString() Requiring something like that is a smell http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment8http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment8Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:00:05 GMTAnother solution is to use a logging system that traverse all the innerexception dumping everything. But the suggestion of ayende is real true, when you create a custom exception always remember to include all the information in the ToString(). Alk. http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment7http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment7Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:10:57 GMTWhy isn't it standard to run a reflection-based object dumper against the exception? If the nesting level is set to something high, one should get all nested exceptions, anything in the IDictionary, and any custom properties. One does need to watch out for sensitive information, which is why I think there should be an exception with a SensitiveData dictionary that one can derive from if it is possible that your exception might have sensitive information. If that is too hard, add SensitiveData to Exception. When I put lots of information in my exceptions, I find that debugging often isn't required. It's so nice to see an error and say, "I know _exactly_ what caused that." http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment6http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment6Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:40:03 GMTI always include any original exception in the ones I throw - and when an exception is logged, both the ToString() and the full message + stack trace are included. The full info is hidden until a button is pressed (quite easy in HTML). http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment5http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment5Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:00:52 GMTAyende's not talking about losing nested exception information, he's talking about ancillary information that is stored in a custom exception type that may not be revealed in the ToString(). This is problematic because unless you explicitly decode each exception type, you won't see these details. That can make the difference between spending hours futilely chasing down a problem based on a vague exception message and a stack trace and being led right to the root cause thanks to some extra little detail (that was in the exception object but perhaps not represented in the message). Anyways, I definitely agree with Ayende on this point. If you've got some extra details available on your custom exception type then you should include them in the ToString() wherever possible since that's what most people will see in the end. http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment4http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment4Thu, 06 Dec 2007 11:13:26 GMTI think all creators of frameworks where you cannot prevent the swallowing of exception information, should be smacked on the head repeatedly with their own keyboard, until their code does allow the exception details... or am I too harsh (I could be one of them :P )? http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment3http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment3Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:45:10 GMTinheritance, I have clarified it in the post http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment2http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment2Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:44:56 GMTIt's not clear to me whether when you say "exception hierarchies" you mean in terms of inheritance, or nested exceptions. Using nested exceptions gives the desired behaviour automatically: using System; class Test { static void Main() { Exception inner = new Exception("Inner detail"); Exception outer = new Exception("Outer detail", inner); Console.WriteLine (outer.ToString()); } } Output: System.Exception: Outer detail ---> System.Exception: Inner detail --- End of inner exception stack trace --- (There would be stack traces if the exceptions had actually been thrown, of course.) Jon http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment1http://ayende.com/3012/exception-handling-best-practices#comment1Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:36:43 GMT