C# Tester Doer Pattern

This C# article tests the performance of the tester-doer pattern. It compares try and catch.
Tester-Doer. The tester-doer pattern describes certain methods. These methods first test the input before doing anything with it. We test the tester-doer pattern. In some programs, exception handling and tester-doer are interchangeable.
First, Microsoft introduces the tester-doer pattern as a solution to exception performance. TryGetValue is an example of the tester-doer pattern. Tester-doer methods often are called within an if-statement.

Quote: Consider the Tester-Doer pattern for members that may throw exceptions in common scenarios to avoid performance problems related to exceptions (Exceptions and Performance, Microsoft).

Example. If your method fails frequently, you usually should test for failure to avoid an exception. However, what if your code doesn't fail often? How expensive is a try-catch block that is almost never used, but still present in the method?

Next: This section compares code that tests first, and code that assumes a certain case.

Example 1: The first example here uses the tester-doer pattern. This will always avoid exceptions related to the Dictionary. We use ContainsKey to test.


Example 2: This code skips checking for the unlikely case where the key is found. We use a try statement and a catch statement.

C# program that uses tester-doer pattern using System.Collections.Generic; class Program { static void Main() { var d = new Dictionary<string, int>(); if (!d.ContainsKey("ok")) { d.Add("ok", 1); } } } C# program that uses try-catch using System.Collections.Generic; class Program { static void Main() { var d = new Dictionary<string, int>(); try { d.Add("ok", 1); } catch { } } } Tester-doer pattern timing If check: 780 ms Try-catch: 609 ms [faster]
Discussion. I found that in this example it is best to write code that assumes success when success is most likely. In other words, you should not test for cases that are unlikely or exceptional. Leave the unlikely stuff to exception-handling.

Note: 4000000 iterations were tested. Clear() method on Dictionary was called in each iteration. Code samples A and B were used.

This means that exceptions that are not thrown are sometimes cheaper than lots of manual if checks. It follows that if your checks are really fast, the difference would be smaller.

Tip: The example that catches rare exceptions can use application-wide logging methods to record them and put them in a central place.

Tip 2: I usually avoid writing exceptions to disk. I often just view them while the application is running.

Summary. We looked at the tester-doer pattern in the C# programming language. Exceptions are critical and can be faster in certain cases than always checking for failure. But in many contexts, tester-doer is the best choice.
© 2007-2019 Sam Allen. Every person is special and unique. Send bug reports to info@dotnetperls.com.
Dot Net Perls