Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Eccouncil Exam 312-96 Topic 1 Question 21 Discussion

Actual exam question for Eccouncil's 312-96 exam
Question #: 21
Topic #: 1
[All 312-96 Questions]

Which of the following method will you use in place of ex.printStackTrace() method to avoid printing stack trace on error?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

by Harrison at Jul 06, 2024, 09:10 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium 312-96 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Mariann
2 months ago
Ah, the age-old question of how to handle exceptions without drowning in a sea of stack traces. C) ex.getMessage(); is the way to go, my friends. Now, who's up for a game of 'Guess the NullPointerException'?
upvoted 0 times
Adell
1 months ago
Definitely, ex.getMessage() is the way to go for error handling.
upvoted 0 times
...
Oliva
1 months ago
I agree, it's much cleaner and easier to read than printing the whole stack trace.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jaime
1 months ago
Yeah, that's the best way to handle exceptions without cluttering the output.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kaitlyn
1 months ago
I always use C) ex.getMessage(); to avoid those pesky stack traces.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Claudia
3 months ago
A) ex.StackTrace.getError(); sounds like it's trying too hard. C) ex.getMessage(); is the winner, no doubt about it.
upvoted 0 times
Sharen
29 days ago
ex.StackTrace.getError(); does seem a bit excessive compared to ex.getMessage();
upvoted 0 times
...
Rana
1 months ago
I agree, ex.getMessage(); is much cleaner than the other options.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jennifer
1 months ago
C) ex.getMessage(); is definitely the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Evelynn
2 months ago
B) ex.message(); doesn't seem like the right choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Scarlet
2 months ago
A) ex.StackTrace.getError(); seems unnecessary.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arleen
2 months ago
C) ex.getMessage(); is definitely the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Terry
3 months ago
D) ex.getError(); would be my pick, but I guess the Java gods have decided C) is the way to go. Time to update my Java cheat sheet!
upvoted 0 times
...
Timmy
3 months ago
B) ex.message(); sounds more intuitive, but C) ex.getMessage(); is the correct answer. Gotta love those concise Java methods!
upvoted 0 times
Macy
2 months ago
Yeah, ex.message(); may sound more intuitive, but ex.getMessage(); is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
...
Truman
2 months ago
I agree, ex.getMessage(); is the correct method to use.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ressie
3 months ago
C) ex.getMessage(); is the way to go! Printing the stack trace can be overwhelming, and this method gives you the error message in a cleaner way.
upvoted 0 times
Nina
2 months ago
ex.getError() is not a valid method, so ex.getMessage() is definitely the best choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
Merissa
2 months ago
ex.message() doesn't give you the full error message like ex.getMessage() does.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lourdes
2 months ago
ex.StackTrace.getError() just adds unnecessary complexity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Meghann
2 months ago
I agree, ex.getMessage() is much cleaner and easier to read.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Dorethea
3 months ago
I'm not sure, but I think D) ex.getError() might also work
upvoted 0 times
...
Ora
3 months ago
I agree with Shelia, using ex.getMessage() will avoid printing the stack trace
upvoted 0 times
...
Shelia
3 months ago
I think the answer is C) ex.getMessage()
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel