Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most.

Learn more about Collectives

Teams

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Learn more about Teams

I like the flatness of the new Async/Await feature available in Typescript, etc. However, I'm not sure I like the fact that I have to declare the variable I'm await ing on the outside of a try...catch block in order to use it later. Like so:

let createdUser
try {
    createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo)
} catch (error) {
    console.error(error)
console.log(createdUser)
// business
// logic
// goes
// here

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to be best practice not to place multiple lines of business logic in the try body, so I'm left only with the alternative of declaring createdUser outside the block, assigning it in the block, and then using it after.

What is best practice in this instance?

"Best practice" is to use what works and is understandable, maintainable, etc.. How could we answer this question "correctly"? I'd just use var, knowing the variable would be hoisted. Is that "wrong"? – Heretic Monkey Jun 20, 2017 at 22:23 try/catch should enclose exactly what you want to capture an exception for. If you're looking explicitly for errors coming from this.User.create() then you wouldn't put anything else inside the try/catch. But, it's also a perfectly reasonable design to put a whole bunch of logic inside a try block. It all depends upon how/where you want to handle an error and how you want to design your exception handling code and what makes sense for a given operation. There is no generic best practice. The ONE generic best practice is to make sure you catch and handle all errors in some appropriate way. – jfriend00 Jun 20, 2017 at 22:23 async/await is part of ES2017 (this year's release), not ES6 (which was released two years ago). – Felix Kling Jun 20, 2017 at 22:50 To add to @jfriend00's comment, if you put your business logic inside the try block, and that code Errors, (TypeError, ReferenceError, etc), that will be catched, which could produce unexpected behavior if you're expecting to only catch promise rejections. – KFunk Aug 13, 2021 at 21:44

It seems to be best practice not to place multiple lines of business logic in the try body

Actually I'd say it is. You usually want to catch all exceptions from working with the value:

try {
    const createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo);
    console.log(createdUser)
    // business logic goes here
} catch (error) {
    console.error(error) // from creation or business logic

If you want to catch and handle errors only from the promise, you have three choices:

  • Declare the variable outside, and branch depending on whether there was an exception or not. That can take various forms, like

  • assign a default value to the variable in the catch block
  • return early or re-throw an exception from the catch block
  • set a flag whether the catch block caught an exception, and test for it in an if condition
  • test for the value of the variable to have been assigned
  •   let createdUser; // or use `var` inside the block
      try {
          createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo);
      } catch (error) {
          console.error(error) // from creation
      if (createdUser) { // user was successfully created
          console.log(createdUser)
          // business logic goes here
    
  • Test the caught exception for its type, and handle or rethrow it based on that.

      try {
          const createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo);
          // user was successfully created
          console.log(createdUser)
          // business logic goes here
      } catch (error) {
          if (error instanceof CreationError) {
              console.error(error) // from creation
          } else {
              throw error;
    

    Unfortunately, standard JavaScript (still) doesn't have syntax support for conditional exceptions.

    If your method doesn't return promises that are rejected with specific enough errors, you can do that yourself by re-throwing something more appropriate in a .catch() handler:

      try {
          const createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo).catch(err => {
              throw new CreationError(err.message, {code: "USER_CREATE"});
    

    See also Handling multiple catches in promise chain for the pre-async/await version of this.

  • Use then with two callbacks instead of try/catch. This really is the least ugly way and my personal recommendation also for its simplicity and correctness, not relying on tagged errors or looks of the result value to distinguish between fulfillment and rejection of the promise:

      await this.User.create(userInfo).then(createdUser => {
          // user was successfully created
          console.log(createdUser)
          // business logic goes here
      }, error => {
          console.error(error) // from creation
    

    Of course it comes with the drawback of introducing callback functions, meaning you cannot as easily break/continue loops or do early returns from the outer function.

    Your last example uses .then() to resolve the promise and provide a callback, so perhaps await has no effect there. – dcorking Jan 24, 2018 at 14:57 I have seen people attaching catch handler directly to await . Is it a good Idea to do that or wrap it inside try/catch? – Saroj Feb 25, 2019 at 17:44 @Saroj const result = await something().catch(err => fallback); is simpler than let result; try { result = await something(); } catch(err) { result = fallback; } so yes in that case I consider it a good idea. – Bergi Feb 25, 2019 at 18:08

    Another simpler approach is to append .catch to the promise function. ex:

    const createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo).catch( error => {
    // handle error
                    I had never thought of this, but I tried it out, and it has an interesting side effect: you can return a result in the .catch() callback to set the value. Otherwise, it returns undefined.
    – Joe Sadoski
                    May 10, 2021 at 23:55
    

    Cleaner code

    using async/await with Promise catch handler.

    From what I see, this has been a long-standing problem that has bugged (both meanings) many programmers and their code. The Promise .catch is really no different from try/catch.

    Working harmoniously with await/async, ES6 Promise's catch handler provides a proper solution and make code cleaner:

    const createUser = await this.User
        .create(userInfo)
        .catch(error => console.error(error))
    console.log(createdUser)
    // business
    // logic
    // goes
    // here
    

    Note that while this answers the question, it gobbles up the error. The intention must be for the execution to continue and not throw. In this case, it's usually always better to be explicit and return false from catch and check for user:

        .catch(error => { 
            console.error(error); 
            return false 
    if (!createdUser) // stop operation
    

    In this case, it is better to throw because (1) this operation (creating a user) is not expected to failed, and (2) you are likely not able to continue:

    const createUser = await this.User
        .create(userInfo)
        .catch(error => {
            // do what you need with the error
            console.error(error)
            // maybe send to Datadog or Sentry
            // don't gobble up the error
            throw error
    console.log(createdUser)
    // business
    // logic
    // goes
    // here
    

    Learning catch doesn't seem like worth it?

    The cleanliness benefits may not be apparent above, but it adds up in real-world complex async operations.

    As an illustration, besides creating user (this.User.create), we can push notification (this.pushNotification) and send email (this.sendEmail).

    this.User.create

    this.User.create = async(userInfo) => {
        // collect some fb data and do some background check in parallel
        const facebookDetails = await retrieveFacebookAsync(userInfo.email)
            .catch(error => {
                // we can do some special error handling
                // and throw back the error
        const backgroundCheck = await backgroundCheckAsync(userInfo.passportID)
        if (backgroundCheck.pass !== true) throw Error('Background check failed')
        // now we can insert everything
        const createdUser = await Database.insert({ ...userInfo, ...facebookDetails })
        return createdUser
    

    this.pushNotifcation and this.sendEmail

    this.pushNotification = async(userInfo) => {
        const pushed = await PushNotificationProvider.send(userInfo)
        return pushed
    this.sendEmail = async(userInfo) => {
        const sent = await mail({ to: userInfo.email, message: 'Welcome' })
        return sent
    

    Compose the operations:

    const createdUser = await this.User
        .create(userInfo)
        .catch(error => {
            // handle error
    // business logic here
    return await Promise.all([
        this.pushNotification(userInfo),
        this.sendEmail(userInfo)
    ]).catch(error => {
        // handle errors caused
        // by pushNotification or sendEmail
    

    No try/catch. And it's clear what errors you are handling.

    I usually use the Promise's catch() function to return an object with an error property on failure.

    For example, in your case i'd do:

    const createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo)
              .catch(error => { error }); // <--- the added catch
    if (Object(createdUser).error) {
        console.error(error)
    

    If you don't like to keep adding the catch() calls, you can add a helper function to the Function's prototype:

    Function.prototype.withCatcher = function withCatcher() {
        const result = this.apply(this, arguments);
        if (!Object(result).catch) {
            throw `${this.name}() must return a Promise when using withCatcher()`;
        return result.catch(error => ({ error }));
    

    And now you'll be able to do:

    const createdUser = await this.User.create.withCatcher(userInfo);
    if (Object(createdUser).error) {
        console.error(createdUser.error);
    EDIT 03/2020
    

    You can also add a default "catch to an error object" function to the Promise object like so:

    Promise.prototype.catchToObj = function catchToObj() {
        return this.catch(error => ({ error }));
    

    And then use it as follows:

    const createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo).catchToObj();
    if (createdUser && createdUser.error) {
        console.error(createdUser.error);
                    @newguy catchToObj will exist on every Promise object after you call the first code segment in my answer. If your function doesn't return a Promise it won't work
    – Arik
                    May 17, 2020 at 10:13
                    I am using the Sequelize's create method which returns a Promise<Model>.                   definition is : public static async create(values: object, options: object): Promise<Model>
    – newguy
                    May 17, 2020 at 12:44
    

    @Bergi Answer is good, but I think it's not the best way because you have to go back to the old then() method, so i think a better way is to catch the error in the async function

    async function someAsyncFunction(){
        const createdUser = await this.User.create(userInfo);
        console.log(createdUser)
    someAsyncFunction().catch(console.log);
    
  • But what if we have many await in the same function and need to catch every error?
  • You may declare the to() function

    function to(promise) {
        return promise.then(data => {
            return [null, data];
        .catch(err => [err]);
    

    And then

    async function someAsyncFunction(){
        let err, createdUser, anotherUser;
        [err, createdUser] = await to(this.User.create(userInfo));
        if (err) console.log(`Error is ${err}`);
        else console.log(`createdUser is ${createdUser}`);
        [err, anotherUser] = await to(this.User.create(anotherUserInfo));
        if (err) console.log(`Error is ${err}`);
        else console.log(`anotherUser is ${anotherUser}`);
    someAsyncFunction();
      

    When reading this its: "Wait to this.User.create".

    Finally you can create the module "to.js" or simply use the await-to-js module.

    You can get more information about to function in this post

    then isn't worse than await because it older. It's just different, and suited for other things. This "await to(…) style" on the other hand is reminiscent of the nodeback style with all its disadvantages. – Bergi Feb 25, 2019 at 19:54 Btw, for better performance and simplicity you should use promise.then(data => [null, data], err => [err, null]); – Bergi Feb 25, 2019 at 20:02 Exactly "It's just different, and suited for other things" await is used for create a code with a "synchronous" like syntax, the use of then and it's callback is more asynchronous syntax. Btw thanks for the code simplicity recommendation :) – Ivan Feb 27, 2019 at 4:07 This is just an example of how I would use async/await/catch. The .then() block has two callbacks: first, if this.User.create() resolves, and if it doesn't. – Laravellous Martins Aug 12, 2022 at 14:44

    Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!

    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

    But avoid

    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

  •