是否有可能在java中构造一段代码，使假设的java.lang. chucknorrisexception无法捕获?

是的，这就是答案:设计你的java.lang.ChuckNorrisException，使它不是java.lang.Throwable的实例。为什么?从定义上讲，不可抛出的对象是不可捕获的，因为你永远不能捕获永远不能抛出的东西。

这个主题的另一个变体是，您可以从Java代码抛出未声明的受控异常。由于它没有在方法签名中声明，所以编译器不会让您捕获异常本身，尽管您可以将其作为java.lang.Exception捕获。

这里有一个帮助类，它允许你抛出任何东西，无论是否声明:

public class SneakyThrow {
  public static RuntimeException sneak(Throwable t) {
    throw SneakyThrow.<RuntimeException> throwGivenThrowable(t);
  }

  private static <T extends Throwable> RuntimeException throwGivenThrowable(Throwable t) throws T {
    throw (T) t;
  }
}

现在扔SneakyThrow。溜(新ChuckNorrisException ());抛出ChuckNorrisException，但编译器抱怨

try {
  throw SneakyThrow.sneak(new ChuckNorrisException());
} catch (ChuckNorrisException e) {
}

如果ChuckNorrisException是一个受控异常，则捕获没有抛出的异常。

Java中唯一的chucknorrisexception应该是OutOfMemoryError和StackOverflowError。

实际上，您可以“捕获”它们，这意味着在抛出异常时将执行catch(OutOfMemoryError ex)，但该块将自动将异常重新抛出给调用者。

我不认为公共类ChuckNorrisError extends Error可以解决这个问题，但是你可以尝试一下。我没有找到关于扩展错误的文档

在这种例外情况下，显然必须使用System.exit(Integer.MIN_VALUE);从构造函数中，因为如果抛出这样的异常，就会发生这种情况;)

经过思考，我成功地创建了一个不可捕捉的异常。然而，我选择取名为JulesWinnfield，而不是Chuck，因为这是一个蘑菇云的母亲例外。此外，它可能不是你想要的，但它肯定不会被捕捉到。观察:

public static class JulesWinnfield extends Exception
{
    JulesWinnfield()
    {
        System.err.println("Say 'What' again! I dare you! I double dare you!");
        System.exit(25-17); // And you shall know I am the LORD
    }
}
    
    
public static void main(String[] args)
{       
    try
    {
        throw new JulesWinnfield();
    } 
    catch(JulesWinnfield jw)
    {
        System.out.println("There's a word for that Jules - a bum");
    }
}

果不其然!未捕获异常。

输出:

运行: 再说一遍“什么”!我敢打赌!我真不敢相信你! Java结果:8 BUILD SUCCESSFUL(总时间:0秒)

等我有更多的时间，我再看看能不能想出别的办法。

还有，看看这个:

public static class JulesWinnfield extends Exception
{
    JulesWinnfield() throws JulesWinnfield, VincentVega
    {
        throw new VincentVega();
    }
}

public static class VincentVega extends Exception
{
    VincentVega() throws JulesWinnfield, VincentVega
    {
        throw new JulesWinnfield();
    }
}


public static void main(String[] args) throws VincentVega
{
    
    try
    {
        throw new JulesWinnfield();
    }
    catch(JulesWinnfield jw)
    {
        
    }
    catch(VincentVega vv)
    {
        
    }
}

导致堆栈溢出-同样，异常仍然未捕获。

Two fundamental problems with exception handling in Java are that it uses the type of an exception to indicate whether action should be taken based upon it, and that anything which takes action based upon an exception (i.e. "catch"es it) is presumed to resolve the underlying condition. It would be useful to have a means by which an exception object could decide which handlers should execute, and whether the handlers that have executed so far have cleaned things up enough for the present method to satisfy its exit conditions. While this could be used to make "uncatchable" exceptions, two bigger uses would be to (1) make exceptions which will only be considered handled when they're caught by code that actually knows how to deal with them, and (2) allow for sensible handling of exceptions which occur in a finally block (if a FooException during a finally block during the unwinding of a BarException, both exceptions should propagate up the call stack; both should be catchable, but unwinding should continue until both have been caught). Unfortunately, I don't think there would be any way to make existing exception-handling code work that way without breaking things.