Why use the “finally” keyword? [duplicate]Why do we use finally blocks?Why use finally in C#?Why is try … finally … good; try … catch bad?Do try/catch blocks hurt performance when exceptions are not thrown?Reference — What does this symbol mean in PHP?Throwing exceptions in a PHP Try Catch blockWhy shouldn't I use mysql_* functions in PHP?How to capture no file for fs.readFileSync()?What is the benefit to use “finally” after try-catch block in java?PHP parse/syntax errors; and how to solve them?Finally block executing before catchHow is the keyword 'finally' meant to be used in PHP?

Shabbat clothing on shabbat chazon

Word or idiom defining something barely functional

Is it really ~648.69 km/s delta-v to "land" on the surface of the Sun?

Double blind peer review when paper cites author's GitHub repo for code

How can you evade tax by getting employment income just in equity, then using this equity as collateral to take out loan?

Acceptable to cut steak before searing?

Does a code snippet compile? Or does it gets compiled?

What is the best way to cause swarm intelligence to be destroyed?

Infeasibility in mathematical optimization models

Can a character who casts Shapechange and turns into a spellcaster use innate spellcasting to cast spells with a long casting time?

Should I self-publish my novella on Amazon or try my luck getting publishers?

How would a family travel from Indiana to Texas in 1911?

How to display a duet in lyrics?

Dropdowns & Chevrons for Right to Left languages

Reusing story title as chapter title

Do other countries guarantee freedoms that the United States does not have?

Is refreshing multiple times a test case for web applications?

Can a College of Swords bard use Blade Flourishes multiple times in a turn?

Why are physicists so interested in irreps if in their non-block-diagonal form they mix all components of a vector?

How do I calculate the difference in lens reach between a superzoom compact and a DSLR zoom lens?

Sierpinski turtle triangle

How would I as a DM create a smart phone-like spell/device my players could use?

Generator for parity?

Are there any differences in causality between linear and logistic regression?



Why use the “finally” keyword? [duplicate]


Why do we use finally blocks?Why use finally in C#?Why is try … finally … good; try … catch bad?Do try/catch blocks hurt performance when exceptions are not thrown?Reference — What does this symbol mean in PHP?Throwing exceptions in a PHP Try Catch blockWhy shouldn't I use mysql_* functions in PHP?How to capture no file for fs.readFileSync()?What is the benefit to use “finally” after try-catch block in java?PHP parse/syntax errors; and how to solve them?Finally block executing before catchHow is the keyword 'finally' meant to be used in PHP?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








13
















This question already has an answer here:



  • Why do we use finally blocks?

    10 answers



I understand what the "finally" keyword is used for in various languages, however, I struggle to understand why you would use it outside of there being a formatting preference in taste.



For instance, in PHP:



try 
possibleErrorThrownFunction();

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error

finally
// run this code every single time regardless of error or not



What's the difference between what this code is doing and this?



try 
possibleErrorThrownFunction();

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error


// run this code every single time regardless of error or not


Doesn't that last line always get run anyway due to the error being caught? In which case, there is no case to really use finally unless you just want to maintain a code-style formatting?



An example of a case where a finally statement is necessary and distinct from just putting code after try/catch statements would be helpful if I am missing something here.










share|improve this question
















marked as duplicate by John Conde, Alma Do php
Users with the  php badge can single-handedly close php questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();

);
);
);
Jul 30 at 14:42


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • 10





    Finally will always be executed, if exception was thrown or not. This is often used for clean-up tasks like unlocking files or what the compiler (PHP) does not do itself.

    – Markus Zeller
    Jul 29 at 20:20






  • 3





    As @MarkusZeller states, it's commonly used for cleanup. Checkout the java docs for a good detail: docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/exceptions/…

    – briansol
    Jul 29 at 20:21







  • 1





    @MarkusZeller php is interpreted, not compiled.

    – bassxzero
    Jul 29 at 20:23






  • 6





    If you throw an exception that isn't handled by any of the catch clauses or if you throw an exception from within any of the handlers, then the code following the catch clauses will never be executed, while a finally block will get executed before the exception is further propagated down the call stack

    – foobar
    Jul 29 at 20:24







  • 2





    @bassxzero Yes, the (PHP) code is interpreted, but in the end it is compiled to bytecode. That does not change the finally behavior.

    – Markus Zeller
    Jul 29 at 20:30

















13
















This question already has an answer here:



  • Why do we use finally blocks?

    10 answers



I understand what the "finally" keyword is used for in various languages, however, I struggle to understand why you would use it outside of there being a formatting preference in taste.



For instance, in PHP:



try 
possibleErrorThrownFunction();

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error

finally
// run this code every single time regardless of error or not



What's the difference between what this code is doing and this?



try 
possibleErrorThrownFunction();

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error


// run this code every single time regardless of error or not


Doesn't that last line always get run anyway due to the error being caught? In which case, there is no case to really use finally unless you just want to maintain a code-style formatting?



An example of a case where a finally statement is necessary and distinct from just putting code after try/catch statements would be helpful if I am missing something here.










share|improve this question
















marked as duplicate by John Conde, Alma Do php
Users with the  php badge can single-handedly close php questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();

);
);
);
Jul 30 at 14:42


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • 10





    Finally will always be executed, if exception was thrown or not. This is often used for clean-up tasks like unlocking files or what the compiler (PHP) does not do itself.

    – Markus Zeller
    Jul 29 at 20:20






  • 3





    As @MarkusZeller states, it's commonly used for cleanup. Checkout the java docs for a good detail: docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/exceptions/…

    – briansol
    Jul 29 at 20:21







  • 1





    @MarkusZeller php is interpreted, not compiled.

    – bassxzero
    Jul 29 at 20:23






  • 6





    If you throw an exception that isn't handled by any of the catch clauses or if you throw an exception from within any of the handlers, then the code following the catch clauses will never be executed, while a finally block will get executed before the exception is further propagated down the call stack

    – foobar
    Jul 29 at 20:24







  • 2





    @bassxzero Yes, the (PHP) code is interpreted, but in the end it is compiled to bytecode. That does not change the finally behavior.

    – Markus Zeller
    Jul 29 at 20:30













13












13








13


1







This question already has an answer here:



  • Why do we use finally blocks?

    10 answers



I understand what the "finally" keyword is used for in various languages, however, I struggle to understand why you would use it outside of there being a formatting preference in taste.



For instance, in PHP:



try 
possibleErrorThrownFunction();

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error

finally
// run this code every single time regardless of error or not



What's the difference between what this code is doing and this?



try 
possibleErrorThrownFunction();

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error


// run this code every single time regardless of error or not


Doesn't that last line always get run anyway due to the error being caught? In which case, there is no case to really use finally unless you just want to maintain a code-style formatting?



An example of a case where a finally statement is necessary and distinct from just putting code after try/catch statements would be helpful if I am missing something here.










share|improve this question

















This question already has an answer here:



  • Why do we use finally blocks?

    10 answers



I understand what the "finally" keyword is used for in various languages, however, I struggle to understand why you would use it outside of there being a formatting preference in taste.



For instance, in PHP:



try 
possibleErrorThrownFunction();

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error

finally
// run this code every single time regardless of error or not



What's the difference between what this code is doing and this?



try 
possibleErrorThrownFunction();

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error


// run this code every single time regardless of error or not


Doesn't that last line always get run anyway due to the error being caught? In which case, there is no case to really use finally unless you just want to maintain a code-style formatting?



An example of a case where a finally statement is necessary and distinct from just putting code after try/catch statements would be helpful if I am missing something here.





This question already has an answer here:



  • Why do we use finally blocks?

    10 answers







php error-handling try-catch






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jul 29 at 21:07









Kaii

16.2k2 gold badges31 silver badges54 bronze badges




16.2k2 gold badges31 silver badges54 bronze badges










asked Jul 29 at 20:13









JakeJake

2,4541 gold badge6 silver badges10 bronze badges




2,4541 gold badge6 silver badges10 bronze badges





marked as duplicate by John Conde, Alma Do php
Users with the  php badge can single-handedly close php questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();

);
);
);
Jul 30 at 14:42


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.











marked as duplicate by John Conde, Alma Do php
Users with the  php badge can single-handedly close php questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();

);
);
);
Jul 30 at 14:42


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.









marked as duplicate by John Conde, Alma Do php
Users with the  php badge can single-handedly close php questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();

);
);
);
Jul 30 at 14:42


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.









  • 10





    Finally will always be executed, if exception was thrown or not. This is often used for clean-up tasks like unlocking files or what the compiler (PHP) does not do itself.

    – Markus Zeller
    Jul 29 at 20:20






  • 3





    As @MarkusZeller states, it's commonly used for cleanup. Checkout the java docs for a good detail: docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/exceptions/…

    – briansol
    Jul 29 at 20:21







  • 1





    @MarkusZeller php is interpreted, not compiled.

    – bassxzero
    Jul 29 at 20:23






  • 6





    If you throw an exception that isn't handled by any of the catch clauses or if you throw an exception from within any of the handlers, then the code following the catch clauses will never be executed, while a finally block will get executed before the exception is further propagated down the call stack

    – foobar
    Jul 29 at 20:24







  • 2





    @bassxzero Yes, the (PHP) code is interpreted, but in the end it is compiled to bytecode. That does not change the finally behavior.

    – Markus Zeller
    Jul 29 at 20:30












  • 10





    Finally will always be executed, if exception was thrown or not. This is often used for clean-up tasks like unlocking files or what the compiler (PHP) does not do itself.

    – Markus Zeller
    Jul 29 at 20:20






  • 3





    As @MarkusZeller states, it's commonly used for cleanup. Checkout the java docs for a good detail: docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/exceptions/…

    – briansol
    Jul 29 at 20:21







  • 1





    @MarkusZeller php is interpreted, not compiled.

    – bassxzero
    Jul 29 at 20:23






  • 6





    If you throw an exception that isn't handled by any of the catch clauses or if you throw an exception from within any of the handlers, then the code following the catch clauses will never be executed, while a finally block will get executed before the exception is further propagated down the call stack

    – foobar
    Jul 29 at 20:24







  • 2





    @bassxzero Yes, the (PHP) code is interpreted, but in the end it is compiled to bytecode. That does not change the finally behavior.

    – Markus Zeller
    Jul 29 at 20:30







10




10





Finally will always be executed, if exception was thrown or not. This is often used for clean-up tasks like unlocking files or what the compiler (PHP) does not do itself.

– Markus Zeller
Jul 29 at 20:20





Finally will always be executed, if exception was thrown or not. This is often used for clean-up tasks like unlocking files or what the compiler (PHP) does not do itself.

– Markus Zeller
Jul 29 at 20:20




3




3





As @MarkusZeller states, it's commonly used for cleanup. Checkout the java docs for a good detail: docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/exceptions/…

– briansol
Jul 29 at 20:21






As @MarkusZeller states, it's commonly used for cleanup. Checkout the java docs for a good detail: docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/exceptions/…

– briansol
Jul 29 at 20:21





1




1





@MarkusZeller php is interpreted, not compiled.

– bassxzero
Jul 29 at 20:23





@MarkusZeller php is interpreted, not compiled.

– bassxzero
Jul 29 at 20:23




6




6





If you throw an exception that isn't handled by any of the catch clauses or if you throw an exception from within any of the handlers, then the code following the catch clauses will never be executed, while a finally block will get executed before the exception is further propagated down the call stack

– foobar
Jul 29 at 20:24






If you throw an exception that isn't handled by any of the catch clauses or if you throw an exception from within any of the handlers, then the code following the catch clauses will never be executed, while a finally block will get executed before the exception is further propagated down the call stack

– foobar
Jul 29 at 20:24





2




2





@bassxzero Yes, the (PHP) code is interpreted, but in the end it is compiled to bytecode. That does not change the finally behavior.

– Markus Zeller
Jul 29 at 20:30





@bassxzero Yes, the (PHP) code is interpreted, but in the end it is compiled to bytecode. That does not change the finally behavior.

– Markus Zeller
Jul 29 at 20:30












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















27














Short Answer



Finally blocks are guaranteed to run no matter what happens inside of the try and catch blocks, before allowing the program to crash.



This is sort of explained here: https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.exceptions.php though the explanation isn't particularly detailed.



Some More Detail



One example that comes to the top of my head is if you are dealing with input/output streams or something similar that has to be closed after use in order to avoid a memory leak. To use your example:



try 
memoryUser.startReading(someFileOrSomething);

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error
invisibleBug.whoops(); // i.e. something goes wrong in this block


memoryUser.Close(); // because something went wrong in the catch block,
// this never runs, which, in this case, causes a memory leak


In this case, wrapping the memoryUser.Close(); in a finally block would ensure that that line would run before the rest of the program exploded, preventing the memory leak even in an otherwise catastrophic failure.



TL;DR



So a lot of the time, people put the finally block there to ensure an important line runs, even if they overlooked something in the catch blocks. This is how I've always seen it used.



Hopefully this helps :)






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Just to make sure I understand what you're conveying, the condition that I'm not seeing is when an error occurs in the catch statement(s); in which case a finally statement can still run despite a new, uncaught error arising? The implication being, that you should in fact use finally statements since you can't always predict errors in catch statements?

    – Jake
    Jul 29 at 21:26






  • 1





    Although the syntax appears to be Java, this is a good example and explanation.

    – adam
    Jul 29 at 21:58






  • 2





    Precisely :) Another possible exception for when you might not need a finally block could be if the catch is incredibly simple (like maybe System.out.println("uh oh"); but it I usually just prefer being safe to sorry :) @adam thank you and good eye. I am more familiar with Java, but figured that the concept would be the same.

    – Reagan Duggins
    Jul 29 at 22:34







  • 1





    @Jake - Sometimes you also DON'T write catch blocks. Like try ... finally ... . Then the exception will get propagated upwards (caught in some other method which can handle it), but the finally block will run anyway cleaning up whatever needs to be cleaned up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:38







  • 1





    @Jake - And at other times, you don't fully handle the exception. Like, you do a little bit in your catch (maybe log it or add some details to the exception object), but then re-throw the exception so that some higher level can catch it and handle it properly. Again, finally cleans up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:39



















24














What's special about a finally block is that it will always run at the end of the try block.



  • It will run if the code in the try block completes successfully.


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that was caught by a catch . (The finally runs after the catch .)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that wasn't handled by any catch block, or if there weren't any at all. (The finally block runs before the exception is propagated to the caller.)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception, and the code in the catch throws another exception (or rethrows the same exception).


  • It will even run if the code in the try block, or in a catch block, uses return. (Just as with an uncaught exception, the finally runs before the function actually returns.) The finally block can even use return itself, and its return value will override the value that the other block tried to return!


(There is one edge case where a finally block won't run, and that's if the entire process is destroyed, e.g. by being killed, or by calling exit() or die().)






share|improve this answer



























  • To compare and contrast the two snippets in the question, it might be worth mentioning in which of these cases regular code after the try/catch/finally would run. (The first two? I'm not sure.)

    – ilkkachu
    Jul 30 at 12:36











  • @ilkkachu yes only in the first two.

    – Kaii
    Jul 30 at 14:12



















2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









27














Short Answer



Finally blocks are guaranteed to run no matter what happens inside of the try and catch blocks, before allowing the program to crash.



This is sort of explained here: https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.exceptions.php though the explanation isn't particularly detailed.



Some More Detail



One example that comes to the top of my head is if you are dealing with input/output streams or something similar that has to be closed after use in order to avoid a memory leak. To use your example:



try 
memoryUser.startReading(someFileOrSomething);

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error
invisibleBug.whoops(); // i.e. something goes wrong in this block


memoryUser.Close(); // because something went wrong in the catch block,
// this never runs, which, in this case, causes a memory leak


In this case, wrapping the memoryUser.Close(); in a finally block would ensure that that line would run before the rest of the program exploded, preventing the memory leak even in an otherwise catastrophic failure.



TL;DR



So a lot of the time, people put the finally block there to ensure an important line runs, even if they overlooked something in the catch blocks. This is how I've always seen it used.



Hopefully this helps :)






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Just to make sure I understand what you're conveying, the condition that I'm not seeing is when an error occurs in the catch statement(s); in which case a finally statement can still run despite a new, uncaught error arising? The implication being, that you should in fact use finally statements since you can't always predict errors in catch statements?

    – Jake
    Jul 29 at 21:26






  • 1





    Although the syntax appears to be Java, this is a good example and explanation.

    – adam
    Jul 29 at 21:58






  • 2





    Precisely :) Another possible exception for when you might not need a finally block could be if the catch is incredibly simple (like maybe System.out.println("uh oh"); but it I usually just prefer being safe to sorry :) @adam thank you and good eye. I am more familiar with Java, but figured that the concept would be the same.

    – Reagan Duggins
    Jul 29 at 22:34







  • 1





    @Jake - Sometimes you also DON'T write catch blocks. Like try ... finally ... . Then the exception will get propagated upwards (caught in some other method which can handle it), but the finally block will run anyway cleaning up whatever needs to be cleaned up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:38







  • 1





    @Jake - And at other times, you don't fully handle the exception. Like, you do a little bit in your catch (maybe log it or add some details to the exception object), but then re-throw the exception so that some higher level can catch it and handle it properly. Again, finally cleans up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:39
















27














Short Answer



Finally blocks are guaranteed to run no matter what happens inside of the try and catch blocks, before allowing the program to crash.



This is sort of explained here: https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.exceptions.php though the explanation isn't particularly detailed.



Some More Detail



One example that comes to the top of my head is if you are dealing with input/output streams or something similar that has to be closed after use in order to avoid a memory leak. To use your example:



try 
memoryUser.startReading(someFileOrSomething);

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error
invisibleBug.whoops(); // i.e. something goes wrong in this block


memoryUser.Close(); // because something went wrong in the catch block,
// this never runs, which, in this case, causes a memory leak


In this case, wrapping the memoryUser.Close(); in a finally block would ensure that that line would run before the rest of the program exploded, preventing the memory leak even in an otherwise catastrophic failure.



TL;DR



So a lot of the time, people put the finally block there to ensure an important line runs, even if they overlooked something in the catch blocks. This is how I've always seen it used.



Hopefully this helps :)






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Just to make sure I understand what you're conveying, the condition that I'm not seeing is when an error occurs in the catch statement(s); in which case a finally statement can still run despite a new, uncaught error arising? The implication being, that you should in fact use finally statements since you can't always predict errors in catch statements?

    – Jake
    Jul 29 at 21:26






  • 1





    Although the syntax appears to be Java, this is a good example and explanation.

    – adam
    Jul 29 at 21:58






  • 2





    Precisely :) Another possible exception for when you might not need a finally block could be if the catch is incredibly simple (like maybe System.out.println("uh oh"); but it I usually just prefer being safe to sorry :) @adam thank you and good eye. I am more familiar with Java, but figured that the concept would be the same.

    – Reagan Duggins
    Jul 29 at 22:34







  • 1





    @Jake - Sometimes you also DON'T write catch blocks. Like try ... finally ... . Then the exception will get propagated upwards (caught in some other method which can handle it), but the finally block will run anyway cleaning up whatever needs to be cleaned up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:38







  • 1





    @Jake - And at other times, you don't fully handle the exception. Like, you do a little bit in your catch (maybe log it or add some details to the exception object), but then re-throw the exception so that some higher level can catch it and handle it properly. Again, finally cleans up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:39














27












27








27







Short Answer



Finally blocks are guaranteed to run no matter what happens inside of the try and catch blocks, before allowing the program to crash.



This is sort of explained here: https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.exceptions.php though the explanation isn't particularly detailed.



Some More Detail



One example that comes to the top of my head is if you are dealing with input/output streams or something similar that has to be closed after use in order to avoid a memory leak. To use your example:



try 
memoryUser.startReading(someFileOrSomething);

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error
invisibleBug.whoops(); // i.e. something goes wrong in this block


memoryUser.Close(); // because something went wrong in the catch block,
// this never runs, which, in this case, causes a memory leak


In this case, wrapping the memoryUser.Close(); in a finally block would ensure that that line would run before the rest of the program exploded, preventing the memory leak even in an otherwise catastrophic failure.



TL;DR



So a lot of the time, people put the finally block there to ensure an important line runs, even if they overlooked something in the catch blocks. This is how I've always seen it used.



Hopefully this helps :)






share|improve this answer













Short Answer



Finally blocks are guaranteed to run no matter what happens inside of the try and catch blocks, before allowing the program to crash.



This is sort of explained here: https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.exceptions.php though the explanation isn't particularly detailed.



Some More Detail



One example that comes to the top of my head is if you are dealing with input/output streams or something similar that has to be closed after use in order to avoid a memory leak. To use your example:



try 
memoryUser.startReading(someFileOrSomething);

catch (CustomException $customException)
// handle custom error

catch (Exception $exception)
// handle the error
invisibleBug.whoops(); // i.e. something goes wrong in this block


memoryUser.Close(); // because something went wrong in the catch block,
// this never runs, which, in this case, causes a memory leak


In this case, wrapping the memoryUser.Close(); in a finally block would ensure that that line would run before the rest of the program exploded, preventing the memory leak even in an otherwise catastrophic failure.



TL;DR



So a lot of the time, people put the finally block there to ensure an important line runs, even if they overlooked something in the catch blocks. This is how I've always seen it used.



Hopefully this helps :)







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Jul 29 at 20:47









Reagan DugginsReagan Duggins

2663 silver badges5 bronze badges




2663 silver badges5 bronze badges










  • 1





    Just to make sure I understand what you're conveying, the condition that I'm not seeing is when an error occurs in the catch statement(s); in which case a finally statement can still run despite a new, uncaught error arising? The implication being, that you should in fact use finally statements since you can't always predict errors in catch statements?

    – Jake
    Jul 29 at 21:26






  • 1





    Although the syntax appears to be Java, this is a good example and explanation.

    – adam
    Jul 29 at 21:58






  • 2





    Precisely :) Another possible exception for when you might not need a finally block could be if the catch is incredibly simple (like maybe System.out.println("uh oh"); but it I usually just prefer being safe to sorry :) @adam thank you and good eye. I am more familiar with Java, but figured that the concept would be the same.

    – Reagan Duggins
    Jul 29 at 22:34







  • 1





    @Jake - Sometimes you also DON'T write catch blocks. Like try ... finally ... . Then the exception will get propagated upwards (caught in some other method which can handle it), but the finally block will run anyway cleaning up whatever needs to be cleaned up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:38







  • 1





    @Jake - And at other times, you don't fully handle the exception. Like, you do a little bit in your catch (maybe log it or add some details to the exception object), but then re-throw the exception so that some higher level can catch it and handle it properly. Again, finally cleans up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:39













  • 1





    Just to make sure I understand what you're conveying, the condition that I'm not seeing is when an error occurs in the catch statement(s); in which case a finally statement can still run despite a new, uncaught error arising? The implication being, that you should in fact use finally statements since you can't always predict errors in catch statements?

    – Jake
    Jul 29 at 21:26






  • 1





    Although the syntax appears to be Java, this is a good example and explanation.

    – adam
    Jul 29 at 21:58






  • 2





    Precisely :) Another possible exception for when you might not need a finally block could be if the catch is incredibly simple (like maybe System.out.println("uh oh"); but it I usually just prefer being safe to sorry :) @adam thank you and good eye. I am more familiar with Java, but figured that the concept would be the same.

    – Reagan Duggins
    Jul 29 at 22:34







  • 1





    @Jake - Sometimes you also DON'T write catch blocks. Like try ... finally ... . Then the exception will get propagated upwards (caught in some other method which can handle it), but the finally block will run anyway cleaning up whatever needs to be cleaned up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:38







  • 1





    @Jake - And at other times, you don't fully handle the exception. Like, you do a little bit in your catch (maybe log it or add some details to the exception object), but then re-throw the exception so that some higher level can catch it and handle it properly. Again, finally cleans up.

    – Vilx-
    Jul 30 at 11:39








1




1





Just to make sure I understand what you're conveying, the condition that I'm not seeing is when an error occurs in the catch statement(s); in which case a finally statement can still run despite a new, uncaught error arising? The implication being, that you should in fact use finally statements since you can't always predict errors in catch statements?

– Jake
Jul 29 at 21:26





Just to make sure I understand what you're conveying, the condition that I'm not seeing is when an error occurs in the catch statement(s); in which case a finally statement can still run despite a new, uncaught error arising? The implication being, that you should in fact use finally statements since you can't always predict errors in catch statements?

– Jake
Jul 29 at 21:26




1




1





Although the syntax appears to be Java, this is a good example and explanation.

– adam
Jul 29 at 21:58





Although the syntax appears to be Java, this is a good example and explanation.

– adam
Jul 29 at 21:58




2




2





Precisely :) Another possible exception for when you might not need a finally block could be if the catch is incredibly simple (like maybe System.out.println("uh oh"); but it I usually just prefer being safe to sorry :) @adam thank you and good eye. I am more familiar with Java, but figured that the concept would be the same.

– Reagan Duggins
Jul 29 at 22:34






Precisely :) Another possible exception for when you might not need a finally block could be if the catch is incredibly simple (like maybe System.out.println("uh oh"); but it I usually just prefer being safe to sorry :) @adam thank you and good eye. I am more familiar with Java, but figured that the concept would be the same.

– Reagan Duggins
Jul 29 at 22:34





1




1





@Jake - Sometimes you also DON'T write catch blocks. Like try ... finally ... . Then the exception will get propagated upwards (caught in some other method which can handle it), but the finally block will run anyway cleaning up whatever needs to be cleaned up.

– Vilx-
Jul 30 at 11:38






@Jake - Sometimes you also DON'T write catch blocks. Like try ... finally ... . Then the exception will get propagated upwards (caught in some other method which can handle it), but the finally block will run anyway cleaning up whatever needs to be cleaned up.

– Vilx-
Jul 30 at 11:38





1




1





@Jake - And at other times, you don't fully handle the exception. Like, you do a little bit in your catch (maybe log it or add some details to the exception object), but then re-throw the exception so that some higher level can catch it and handle it properly. Again, finally cleans up.

– Vilx-
Jul 30 at 11:39






@Jake - And at other times, you don't fully handle the exception. Like, you do a little bit in your catch (maybe log it or add some details to the exception object), but then re-throw the exception so that some higher level can catch it and handle it properly. Again, finally cleans up.

– Vilx-
Jul 30 at 11:39














24














What's special about a finally block is that it will always run at the end of the try block.



  • It will run if the code in the try block completes successfully.


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that was caught by a catch . (The finally runs after the catch .)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that wasn't handled by any catch block, or if there weren't any at all. (The finally block runs before the exception is propagated to the caller.)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception, and the code in the catch throws another exception (or rethrows the same exception).


  • It will even run if the code in the try block, or in a catch block, uses return. (Just as with an uncaught exception, the finally runs before the function actually returns.) The finally block can even use return itself, and its return value will override the value that the other block tried to return!


(There is one edge case where a finally block won't run, and that's if the entire process is destroyed, e.g. by being killed, or by calling exit() or die().)






share|improve this answer



























  • To compare and contrast the two snippets in the question, it might be worth mentioning in which of these cases regular code after the try/catch/finally would run. (The first two? I'm not sure.)

    – ilkkachu
    Jul 30 at 12:36











  • @ilkkachu yes only in the first two.

    – Kaii
    Jul 30 at 14:12















24














What's special about a finally block is that it will always run at the end of the try block.



  • It will run if the code in the try block completes successfully.


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that was caught by a catch . (The finally runs after the catch .)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that wasn't handled by any catch block, or if there weren't any at all. (The finally block runs before the exception is propagated to the caller.)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception, and the code in the catch throws another exception (or rethrows the same exception).


  • It will even run if the code in the try block, or in a catch block, uses return. (Just as with an uncaught exception, the finally runs before the function actually returns.) The finally block can even use return itself, and its return value will override the value that the other block tried to return!


(There is one edge case where a finally block won't run, and that's if the entire process is destroyed, e.g. by being killed, or by calling exit() or die().)






share|improve this answer



























  • To compare and contrast the two snippets in the question, it might be worth mentioning in which of these cases regular code after the try/catch/finally would run. (The first two? I'm not sure.)

    – ilkkachu
    Jul 30 at 12:36











  • @ilkkachu yes only in the first two.

    – Kaii
    Jul 30 at 14:12













24












24








24







What's special about a finally block is that it will always run at the end of the try block.



  • It will run if the code in the try block completes successfully.


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that was caught by a catch . (The finally runs after the catch .)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that wasn't handled by any catch block, or if there weren't any at all. (The finally block runs before the exception is propagated to the caller.)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception, and the code in the catch throws another exception (or rethrows the same exception).


  • It will even run if the code in the try block, or in a catch block, uses return. (Just as with an uncaught exception, the finally runs before the function actually returns.) The finally block can even use return itself, and its return value will override the value that the other block tried to return!


(There is one edge case where a finally block won't run, and that's if the entire process is destroyed, e.g. by being killed, or by calling exit() or die().)






share|improve this answer















What's special about a finally block is that it will always run at the end of the try block.



  • It will run if the code in the try block completes successfully.


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that was caught by a catch . (The finally runs after the catch .)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception that wasn't handled by any catch block, or if there weren't any at all. (The finally block runs before the exception is propagated to the caller.)


  • It will run if the code in the try block throws an exception, and the code in the catch throws another exception (or rethrows the same exception).


  • It will even run if the code in the try block, or in a catch block, uses return. (Just as with an uncaught exception, the finally runs before the function actually returns.) The finally block can even use return itself, and its return value will override the value that the other block tried to return!


(There is one edge case where a finally block won't run, and that's if the entire process is destroyed, e.g. by being killed, or by calling exit() or die().)







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Jul 30 at 8:34









Ilmari Karonen

39.1k6 gold badges73 silver badges131 bronze badges




39.1k6 gold badges73 silver badges131 bronze badges










answered Jul 29 at 20:49









duskwuffduskwuff

155k21 gold badges192 silver badges245 bronze badges




155k21 gold badges192 silver badges245 bronze badges















  • To compare and contrast the two snippets in the question, it might be worth mentioning in which of these cases regular code after the try/catch/finally would run. (The first two? I'm not sure.)

    – ilkkachu
    Jul 30 at 12:36











  • @ilkkachu yes only in the first two.

    – Kaii
    Jul 30 at 14:12

















  • To compare and contrast the two snippets in the question, it might be worth mentioning in which of these cases regular code after the try/catch/finally would run. (The first two? I'm not sure.)

    – ilkkachu
    Jul 30 at 12:36











  • @ilkkachu yes only in the first two.

    – Kaii
    Jul 30 at 14:12
















To compare and contrast the two snippets in the question, it might be worth mentioning in which of these cases regular code after the try/catch/finally would run. (The first two? I'm not sure.)

– ilkkachu
Jul 30 at 12:36





To compare and contrast the two snippets in the question, it might be worth mentioning in which of these cases regular code after the try/catch/finally would run. (The first two? I'm not sure.)

– ilkkachu
Jul 30 at 12:36













@ilkkachu yes only in the first two.

– Kaii
Jul 30 at 14:12





@ilkkachu yes only in the first two.

– Kaii
Jul 30 at 14:12



Popular posts from this blog

Category:9 (number) SubcategoriesMedia in category "9 (number)"Navigation menuUpload mediaGND ID: 4485639-8Library of Congress authority ID: sh85091979ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

Circuit construction for execution of conditional statements using least significant bitHow are two different registers being used as “control”?How exactly is the stated composite state of the two registers being produced using the $R_zz$ controlled rotations?Efficiently performing controlled rotations in HHLWould this quantum algorithm implementation work?How to prepare a superposed states of odd integers from $1$ to $sqrtN$?Why is this implementation of the order finding algorithm not working?Circuit construction for Hamiltonian simulationHow can I invert the least significant bit of a certain term of a superposed state?Implementing an oracleImplementing a controlled sum operation

Magento 2 “No Payment Methods” in Admin New OrderHow to integrate Paypal Express Checkout with the Magento APIMagento 1.5 - Sales > Order > edit order and shipping methods disappearAuto Invoice Check/Money Order Payment methodAdd more simple payment methods?Shipping methods not showingWhat should I do to change payment methods if changing the configuration has no effects?1.9 - No Payment Methods showing upMy Payment Methods not Showing for downloadable/virtual product when checkout?Magento2 API to access internal payment methodHow to call an existing payment methods in the registration form?