这取决于你是否希望找到这个物体。如果你遵循学校的思想，认为exceptions应该用来表示某事，那么，嗯，呃，exceptions已经发生了:

对象发现;返回对象 没有找到对象;抛出异常

否则，返回null。

只提到null不被认为是异常行为的情况，我肯定是try方法，很明显，没有必要“阅读书籍”或“三思而后行”，就像这里所说的那样

所以:

bool TryFindObject(RequestParam request, out ResponseParam response)

这意味着用户的代码也将是清晰的

...
if(TryFindObject(request, out response)
{
  handleSuccess(response)
}
else
{
  handleFailure()
}
...

这取决于你是否希望找到这个物体。如果你遵循学校的思想，认为exceptions应该用来表示某事，那么，嗯，呃，exceptions已经发生了:

对象发现;返回对象 没有找到对象;抛出异常

否则，返回null。

抛出异常的好处:

Cleaner control flow in your calling code. Checking for null injects a conditional branch which is natively handled by try/catch. Checking for null doesn't indicate what it is you're checking for - are you checking for null because you're looking for an error you're expecting, or are you checking for null so you don't pass it further on downchain? Removes ambiguity of what "null" means. Is null representative of an error or is null what is actually stored in the value? Hard to say when you only have one thing to base that determination off of. Improved consistency between method behavior in an application. Exceptions are typically exposed in method signatures, so you're more able to understand what edge cases the methods in an application account for, and what information your application can react to in a predictable manner.

有关更多示例的解释，请参见:http://metatations.com/2011/11/17/returning-null-vs-throwing-an-exception/

如果您总是希望找到一个值，那么如果缺少该值则抛出异常。这个例外意味着有问题。

如果该值可以缺失或存在，并且两者都对应用程序逻辑有效，则返回null。

更重要的是:在代码的其他地方做什么?一致性很重要。

通常它应该返回null。调用该方法的代码应该决定是抛出异常还是尝试其他操作。