最近，我发表了一篇关于与我一起工作的开发人员没有正确使用 try catch 块，以及不幸地在危急情况下使用 try...catch 块并完全忽略异常错误的帖子。让我心痛。这是他们执行此操作的数千段代码之一的示例（省略了一些无关紧要的代码：
public void AddLocations(BOLocation objBllLocations)
{
try
{
dbManager.Open();
if (objBllLocations.StateID != 0)
{
// about 20 Paramters added to dbManager here
}
else
{
// about 19 Paramters added here
}
dbManager.ExecuteNonQuery(CommandType.StoredProcedure, "ULOCATIONS.AddLocations");
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
}
finally
{
dbManager.Dispose();
}
}
在我看来，这绝对是令人讨厌的，并且在发生某些潜在问题的情况下不会通知用户。我知道很多人说 OOP 是邪恶的，并且添加多个层会增加代码行数和程序的复杂性，从而可能导致代码维护方面的问题。就我个人而言，我的大部分编程背景在这方面都采用了几乎相同的方法。下面我列出了在这种情况下我通常编码方式的基本结构，并且我在我的职业生涯中一直在使用多种语言进行此操作，但是这个特定的代码是用 C# 编写的。但是下面的代码是我如何使用对象的一个很好的基本概念，它似乎对我有用，但由于这是一些相当智能的编程地雷的一个很好的来源，我想知道我是否应该重新评估这个我的技术 用了这么多年。主要是因为，在接下来的几周内，我将投入到外包开发人员提供的不太好的代码中，并修改大量代码。我想尽可能地做到这一点。很抱歉长代码参考。
// *******************************************************************************************
/// <summary>
/// Summary description for BaseBusinessObject
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>
/// Base Class allowing me to do basic function on a Busines Object
/// </remarks>
public class BaseBusinessObject : Object, System.Runtime.Serialization.ISerializable
{
public enum DBCode
{ DBUnknownError,
DBNotSaved,
DBOK
}
// private fields, public properties
public int m_id = -1;
public int ID { get { return m_id; } set { m_id = value; } }
private int m_errorCode = 0;
public int ErrorCode { get { return m_errorCode; } set { m_errorCode = value; } }
private string m_errorMsg = "";
public string ErrorMessage { get { return m_errorMsg; } set { m_errorMsg = value; } }
private Exception m_LastException = null;
public Exception LastException { get { return m_LastException; } set { m_LastException = value;} }
//Constructors
public BaseBusinessObject()
{
Initialize();
}
public BaseBusinessObject(int iID)
{
Initialize();
FillByID(iID);
}
// methods
protected void Initialize()
{
Clear();
Object_OnInit();
// Other Initializable code here
}
public void ClearErrors()
{
m_errorCode = 0; m_errorMsg = ""; m_LastException = null;
}
void System.Runtime.Serialization.ISerializable.GetObjectData(
System.Runtime.Serialization.SerializationInfo info,
System.Runtime.Serialization.StreamingContext context)
{
//Serialization code for Object must be implemented here
}
// overrideable methods
protected virtual void Object_OnInit()
{
// User can override to add additional initialization stuff.
}
public virtual BaseBusinessObject FillByID(int iID)
{
throw new NotImplementedException("method FillByID Must be implemented");
}
public virtual void Clear()
{
throw new NotImplementedException("method Clear Must be implemented");
}
public virtual DBCode Save()
{
throw new NotImplementedException("method Save Must be implemented");
}
}
// *******************************************************************************************
/// <summary>
/// Example Class that might be based off of a Base Business Object
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>
/// Class for holding all the information about a Customer
/// </remarks>
public class BLLCustomer : BaseBusinessObject
{
// ***************************************
// put field members here other than the ID
private string m_name = "";
public string Name { get { return m_name; } set { m_name = value; } }
public override void Clear()
{
m_id = -1;
m_name = "";
}
public override BaseBusinessObject FillByID(int iID)
{
Clear();
try
{
// usually accessing a DataLayerObject,
//to select a database record
}
catch (Exception Ex)
{
Clear();
LastException = Ex;
// I can have many different exception, this is usually an enum
ErrorCode = 3;
ErrorMessage = "Customer couldn't be loaded";
}
return this;
}
public override DBCode Save()
{
DBCode ret = DBCode.DBUnknownError;
try
{
// usually accessing a DataLayerObject,
//to save a database record
ret = DBCode.DBOK;
}
catch (Exception Ex)
{
LastException = Ex;
// I can have many different exception, this is usually an enum
// i do not usually use just a General Exeption
ErrorCode = 3;
ErrorMessage = "some really weird error happened, customer not saved";
ret = DBCode.DBNotSaved;
}
return ret;
}
}
// *******************************************************************************************
// Example of how it's used on an asp page..
protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// Simplifying this a bit, normally, I'd use something like,
// using some sort of static "factory" method
// BaseObject.NewBusinessObject(typeof(BLLCustomer)).FillByID(34);
BLLCustomer cust = ((BLLCustomer)new BLLCustomer()).FillByID(34);
if (cust.ErrorCode != 0)
{
// There was an error.. Error message is in
//cust.ErrorMessage
// some sort of internal error code is in
//cust.ErrorCode
// Give the users some sort of message through and asp:Label..
// probably based off of cust.ErrorMessage
//log can be handled in the data, business layer... or whatever
lab.ErrorText = cust.ErrorMessage;
}
else
{
// continue using the object, to fill in text boxes,
// literals or whatever.
this.labID = cust.ID.toString();
this.labCompName = cust.Name;
}
}
最重要的是，我的问题是，我是否过度复杂化了多层和继承的类，或者我的旧概念是否仍然有效且稳定？现在有更好的方法来完成这些事情吗？我是否应该像同事开发人员建议的那样从页面后面的 asp.net 页面代码直接进行 SQL 调用（尽管最后一个解决方案让我感到恶心），而不是通过业务对象和数据层（数据层不是显示，但基本上保存所有存储的过程调用）。是的，另一位开发人员确实问我为什么要进行分层工作，当您可以直接在页面后面的 *.aspx.cs 代码中输入您需要的内容，然后我就可以享受超过 1k 行代码的乐趣在后面。这里有什么建议？