As already mentioned, the performance is the same. However, user experience isn't necessarily identical. In the first case, you'll fail fast (i.e. after the first error), however if you put the try/catch block inside the loop, you can capture all the errors that would be created for a given call to the method. When parsing an array of values from strings where you expect some formatting errors, there are definitely cases where you'd like to be able to present all the errors to the user so that they don't need to try and fix them one by one.

如果将try/catch放在循环中，则会在异常发生后继续循环。如果你把它放在循环之外，你会在抛出异常时立即停止。

我把0.02美元放进去。有时，您需要在稍后的代码中添加“finally”(因为谁会在第一次就写出完美的代码呢?)在这些情况下，将try/catch放在循环之外突然变得更有意义了。例如:

try {
    for(int i = 0; i < max; i++) {
        String myString = ...;
        float myNum = Float.parseFloat(myString);
        dbConnection.update("MY_FLOATS","INDEX",i,"VALUE",myNum);
    }
} catch (NumberFormatException ex) {
    return null;
} finally {
    dbConnection.release();  // Always release DB connection, even if transaction fails.
}

因为如果出现错误，您只希望释放一次数据库连接(或选择您最喜欢的其他资源类型……)。

As already mentioned, the performance is the same. However, user experience isn't necessarily identical. In the first case, you'll fail fast (i.e. after the first error), however if you put the try/catch block inside the loop, you can capture all the errors that would be created for a given call to the method. When parsing an array of values from strings where you expect some formatting errors, there are definitely cases where you'd like to be able to present all the errors to the user so that they don't need to try and fix them one by one.

如果这是一个全有或全无的失败，那么第一种格式是有意义的。如果希望能够处理/返回所有未失败的元素，则需要使用第二种形式。这些就是我选择方法的基本标准。就我个人而言，如果是孤注一掷，我不会使用第二种形式。

这取决于故障处理。如果你只是想跳过error元素，请尝试内部:

for(int i = 0; i < max; i++) {
    String myString = ...;
    try {
        float myNum = Float.parseFloat(myString);
        myFloats[i] = myNum;
    } catch (NumberFormatException ex) {
        --i;
    }
}

在任何其他情况下，我宁愿到外面去试试。代码更可读，更干净。如果返回null，在错误情况下抛出一个IllegalArgumentException可能会更好。