Exception handling

[sp0rk]

e.printStackTrace() is not a proper way to handle exceptions. You can get errors because of something you haven't anticipated or hardware malfunction. Try your best to always come up with a way of properly handling exceptions. If you are 100% certain an exception is not possible to be thrown, write a comment explaining why inside of the catch block.
At least that's what I've heard as a conventional way of doing this stuff.

[wzieba]

I don't know what exactly do you mean: a lot of methods from Java ME forces me to write them in try catch blocks. Do you think I should do something else in catch?

[sp0rk]

Basically, Java ME forces you to do it because sometimes things can go wrong and then the program will not behave correctly. If, for example you ignore a exception thrown while saving something in your data storage, and user has a full memory, an exception might be thrown. User will not be notified about the fact that something is wrong and will be surprised to notice that the record has not been saved. Logging an exception is useful for developers but useless for the user. If an error is recoverable you should try to do so - ask user if he wants to try again or something.

8. Avoid empty catch blocks
   Nothing is more worse than empty catch block, because it not just hides the Errors and Exception, but also may leave your object in unusable or corrupt state. Empty catch block only make sense, if you absolutely sure that Exception is not going to affect object state on any ways, but still its better to log any error comes during program execution. This is not a Java best practice, but a most common practice, while writing Exception handling code in Java.

Read more: http://javarevisited.blogspot.com/2013/03/0-exception-handling-best-practices-in-Java-Programming.html#ixzz4b7nH7eZj
Read more: http://howtodoinjava.com/best-practices/java-exception-handling-best-practices/#9