在数据层代码中，我有时使用以下代码，允许调用者决定“对象未找到”是否意味着发生了错误。

DataType GetObject(DBConnection conn, string id, bool throwOnNotFound) {
    DataType retval = ... // find object in database
    if (retval != null || ! throwOnNotFound) {
        return retval;
    } else {
        throw new NoRowsFoundException("DataType object with id {id} not found in database");
    }
}

DataType GetObject(DBConnection conn, string id) {
    return GetObject(conn, id, true);
} 

首选返回null——

如果调用者在不检查的情况下使用它，异常就会在那里发生。

如果调用者并没有真正使用它，不要给他一个try/catch块

如果对于客户端代码来说，知道已找到和未找到之间的区别很重要，并且这应该是一个例程行为，那么最好返回null。然后客户端代码可以决定要做什么。

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。

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/