英文:
Code generates an error about not returning a value even though every possible path returns a value
问题
I feel like I'm missing something obvious in my code, but I just don't see it. Is the compiler really not able to detect that the function will never really reach the end? I think the compiler is correct, and I'm just not seeing something really obvious, so asking if anyone can take a look at this and let me know. Thanks in advance.
public async Task<string> MyReadAllTextAsync(string file, FileShare fileShare = FileShare.None, Encoding encoding = null, int retries = 0)
{
for (int i = 0; i <= retries; i++)
{
try
{
// This code is not important for this question
// ... only that it will either return from the function or throw an exception.
using var fileStream = new FileStream(file, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, fileShare);
using var textReader = new StreamReader(fileStream, encoding ?? Encoding.UTF8);
return await textReader.ReadToEndAsync();
}
catch (IOException ex) when (ex.Message.Contains("it is being used by another process"))
{
if (i < retries)
{
await Task.Delay(DelayMs);
continue;
}
throw;
}
}
// Can this code be reached?
// Compiler generates error "not all code paths return a value"
// Compiler is forcing me to add this throw even though I don't think it can ever reach here.
throw new InvalidOperationException("MyReadAllTextAsync failure");
}
Update after question is answered
I got the correction to my code (below), but it still seems to me that the compiler should be able to catch this case now with the update, but it doesn't. Posting it here in case anyone sees another way for the function to reach the end. If you do, comment, and I'll create a separate answer to give you the points for answering.
if (retries < 0) throw new ArgumentException(nameof(retries));
public async Task<string> MyReadAllTextAsync(string file, FileShare fileShare = FileShare.None, Encoding encoding = null, int retries = 0)
{
for (int i = 0; i <= retries; i++)
{
try
{
// This code is not important for this question
// ... only that it will either return from the function or throw an exception.
using var fileStream = new FileStream(file, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, fileShare);
using var textReader = new StreamReader(fileStream, encoding ?? Encoding.UTF8);
return await textReader.ReadToEndAsync();
}
catch (IOException ex) when (ex.Message.Contains("it is being used by another process"))
{
if (i < retries)
{
await Task.Delay(DelayMs);
continue;
}
throw;
}
}
// Can this code be reached?
// Compiler generates error "not all code paths return a value"
// Compiler is forcing me to add this throw even though I don't think it can ever reach here.
throw new InvalidOperationException("MyReadAllTextAsync failure");
}
If you comment out the last line in the function, you get a compiler error even though that line can never be reached (I don't think).
英文:
I feel like I'm missing something obvious in my code, but I just don't see it. Is the compiler really not able to detect that the function will never really reach the end? I think the compiler is correct, and I'm just not seeing something really obvious, so asking if anyone can take a look at this and let me know. Thanks in advance.
public async Task<string> MyReadAllTextAsync(string file, FileShare fileShare = FileShare.None, Encoding encoding = null, int retries = 0)
{
for (int i = 0; i <= retries; i++)
{
try
{
// This code is not important for this question
// ... only that it will either return from the function or throw an exception.
using var fileStream = new FileStream(file, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, fileShare);
using var textReader = new StreamReader(fileStream, encoding ?? Encoding.UTF8);
return await textReader.ReadToEndAsync();
}
catch (IOException ex) when (ex.Message.Contains("it is being used by another process"))
{
if (i < retries)
{
await Task.Delay(DelayMs);
continue;
}
throw;
}
}
// Can this code be reached?
// Compiler generates error "not all code paths return a value"
// Compiler is forcing me to add this throw even though I don't think it can ever reach here.
throw new InvalidOperationException("MyReadAllTextAsync failure");
}
Update after question is answered
I got the correction to my code (below), but it still seems to me that the compiler should be able to catch this case now with the update, but it doesn't. Posting it here in case anyone sees another way for the function to reach the end. If you do, comment, and I'll create a separate answer to give you the points for answering.
if (retries < 0) throw new ArgumentException(nameof(retries));
public async Task<string> MyReadAllTextAsync(string file, FileShare fileShare = FileShare.None, Encoding encoding = null, int retries = 0)
{
for (int i = 0; i <= retries; i++)
{
try
{
// This code is not important for this question
// ... only that it will either return from the function or throw an exception.
using var fileStream = new FileStream(file, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, fileShare);
using var textReader = new StreamReader(fileStream, encoding ?? Encoding.UTF8);
return await textReader.ReadToEndAsync();
}
catch (IOException ex) when (ex.Message.Contains("it is being used by another process"))
{
if (i < retries)
{
await Task.Delay(DelayMs);
continue;
}
throw;
}
}
// Can this code be reached?
// Compiler generates error "not all code paths return a value"
// Compiler is forcing me to add this throw even though I don't think it can ever reach here.
throw new InvalidOperationException("MyReadAllTextAsync failure");
}
If you comment out the last line in the function, you get a compiler error even though that line can never be reached (I don't think).
答案1
得分: 2
以下是您要翻译的内容:
是的,底部抛出异常的代码可以被执行到。如果调用此函数的代码将参数'retries'设置为-1会发生什么?这意味着由于0不小于等于-1,因此不会执行for循环,然后继续执行底部的代码。
我建议在for循环之上添加一些对'retries'参数的验证,以确保如果'retries'参数小于0,则将循环计数器设置为0。
...
var loopCounter = retries;
if (loopCounter < 0)
{
// 如果要使其仅运行一次。
loopCounter = 0;
// 或者如果您希望在不提供任何重试时中断代码流程。
throw new Exception();
}
for (int i = 0; i < loopCounter; i++)
...
您还可以将'retries'参数更改为无符号整数,以便只允许正数(包括0)。
uint retries = 0;
英文:
Yes the code throwing the exception at the bottom can be reached. What if the code calling this function passes in -1 for the parameter 'retries'? That would mean the for loop would not do any loops since 0 is not <= -1 and therefore progress to the bottom code.
I would recommend adding some validation to the retries parameter above the for loop to make that sure that if the parameter 'retries' is less than 0, to then set the loop counter to 0.
...
var loopCounter = retries;
if (loopCounter < 0)
{
// If you want to make it run once.
loopCounter = 0;
// Or if you want to break the code flow if they don't provide any retries.
throw new Exception();
}
for (int i = 0; i < loopCounter; i++)
...
You could also change the 'retries' parameter to be an unsigned int so that way it only allows positive numbers (including 0)
uint retries = 0
答案2
得分: 1
以下是代码的翻译部分:
public async Task<string> MyReadAllTextAsync(string file)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
try
{
return ... // 返回某些内容
}
catch (IOException ex) when (ex.Message.Contains("it is being used by another process"))
{
if (i < retries)
{
continue;
}
throw;
}
}
// 这段代码是否可以被执行到?
}
现在,您的评论// 这段代码是否可以被执行到?
所在的位置可以通过以下方式到达:
-
for
循环的条件一开始就为假:虽然您可以根据常识看到这不太可能发生,但编译器无法判断,它会保留两个路径(逻辑是否进入循环)。您可能会考虑将此for
循环替换为do while
循环(具有在编译时保证至少迭代一次的特性),但还有更多情况需要考虑。 -
您的逻辑依赖于两个不同的条件语句:您可能认为,在重试一定次数后,捕获块中的if语句的条件将变为false,此后代码将始终抛出异常;但是编译器无法保证这一点。对于编译器来说,循环有一个条件语句,捕获块内有另一个条件语句,可以确定代码所采取的路径。编译器不能在这两个条件之间进行任何推断。
请允许我使用下面的代码来说明这一点:
int i = 0;
do
{
try
{
....
....
return ...; // 返回某些内容
}
catch(IOException e)
{
if(<condition_1>) // 行A
continue; // 行B
else throw;
}
}
while(<condition_2>); // 行C
编译器无法保证行A中的<condition_1>
只在循环的最后一次迭代时为false。因此(从编译器的角度看),在捕获块中始终存在一条路径,该路径可以进入continue;
语句(行B),然后进入while的条件语句(行C),如果<condition_2>
在此处为false(因为编译器无法预先知道这一点),则代码可以继续执行下面的内容,退出循环。因此,循环外部存在一条路径。
这也是为什么在您的更新后的代码中仍然出现相同错误的原因。您的代码中捕获块中的条件是i < 5
,而循环中的条件是i <= 5
。任何人都可以推断出这段代码的循环条件何时为真或为假,但只有在所述语句是编译时常量时,编译器才能进行这种推断。因此,如果将循环条件保持为true
,则不管您使用for
循环、while
循环还是do-while
循环都无所谓。现在,编译器具有编译时保证循环始终执行的保证,因此第一个问题也得到了解决。
因此,我建议您将代码更改为以下示例:
public async Task<string> MyReadAllTextAsync(...)
{
for (int i = 0; true; i++) // 循环条件现在是编译时常量,提供了编译时保证循环始终执行
{
try
{
// 此处的代码对于这个问题并不重要
// ... 只是要么从函数中返回,要么抛出异常。
using var fileStream = new FileStream(file, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, fileShare);
using var textReader = new StreamReader(fileStream, encoding ?? Encoding.UTF8);
return await textReader.ReadToEndAsync();
}
catch (IOException ex) when (ex.Message.Contains("it is being used by another process"))
{
await Task.Delay(1000);
if (i < 5) continue; // 代码的流程仅取决于此在运行时计算的条件。
else throw;
}
}
}
英文:
Let me first simply this code further
public async Task<string> MyReadAllTextAsync(string file)
{
for(int i=0;i<5;i++)
{
try
{
return ... // return something
}
catch (IOException ex) when (ex.Message.Contains("it is being used by another process"))
{
if (i < retries)
{
continue;
}
throw;
}
}
// Can this code be reached?
}
Now, the position where your comment // Can this block be reached
is, can be reached by the following ways:
- The condition of the
for
loop can be false to begin with: While you may use common sense to see that would not be the case, the compiler cannot do that, and it keeps two paths (whether the logic enters the loop or not). You might think of replacing this for loop with a do while loop (which has a compile time guarantee of iterating at least once), but there are more cases to consider.
<s>2. Not handling all exceptions ...</s> EDIT: I was wrong in this one. I said earlier that you should check for all exceptions, but that only means other exceptions are not handled. Those unhandled exceptions would simply be thrown, but no path to the code underneath is created because of this.
Here, I simplify the code, just to show the compiler behaviour. The following code has no errors issued by the compiler.
do
{
try
{
....
....
return ...; // return statement after some block of code
}
catch(IOException ex) { throw; } // Any other exception is also thrown
}
while( <condition> ); // Some condition
However, this still doesn't solve your issue, because you want to have another conditional statement in the catch block, and this now introduces the error again, because of the last reason:
- Your logic is dependent on two different conditional statements: It may be obvious to you that after a certain amount of retries, the condition of the if statement in the catch block becomes false, and thereafter your code will always throw; but the compiler does not have that guarantee. To the compiler, there is one conditional statement for loop, and another conditional statement within the catch block that can determine the path taken by the code. The compiler cannot make any inference among these two conditions.
Let me illustrate this with the code below
int i=0;
do
{
try
{
....
....
return ...; // return something
}
catch(IOException e)
{
if(<condition_1>) // line A
continue; // line B
else throw;
}
}
while(<condition_2>); // line C
The compiler has no guarantee that the <condition_1>
in Line A will be false only at the last iteration of the loop. So (in the compiler's perspective), there is always a path within the catch
block that can go to continue;
statement (line B), which then leads to the while's conditional statement (line C), and if the <condition_2>
happens to be false here (Since the compiler cannot know this beforehand), the logic can go below, exiting the loop. Thus, a path exists outside the loop.
This is also the reason you're still getting the same error in your updated code. The condition within the catch block in your code is i < 5
, and the condition within the for loop in your code is i <= 5
. Any human can reason on this code and infer when the loop conditions are true or false, but the compiler can only do such kinds of inference if the said statements are compile time constants. So if the for loop condition is <condition_2>
, and the if block condition (within the catch block) is <condition_1>
, the compiler can assign a path outside the loop as discussed above.
So taking the points into account you must make the loop condition a compile time constant. Now, if you keep the loop condition as true
it does not matter whether you use a for
loop, a while
loop or a do-while
loop. The compiler now has a compile time guarantee that the loop is always executed, so the issue in point #1 is also resolved.
So my suggestion is to make your code as shown
public async Task<string> MyReadAllTextAsync(...)
{
for(int i=0;true;i++) // Loop condition is now a compile time constant, giving a compile-time guarantee that the loop is always executed
{
try
{
// This code is not important for this question
// ... only that it will either return from the function or throw an exception.
using var fileStream = new FileStream(file, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read, fileShare);
using var textReader = new StreamReader(fileStream, encoding ?? Encoding.UTF8);
return await textReader.ReadToEndAsync();
}
catch (IOException ex) when (ex.Message.Contains("it is being used by another process"))
{
await Task.Delay(1000);
if(i<5) continue; // Flow of code only depends on this condition evaluated during runtime.
else throw;
}
}
}
通过集体智慧和协作来改善编程学习和解决问题的方式。致力于成为全球开发者共同参与的知识库,让每个人都能够通过互相帮助和分享经验来进步。
评论