不。Java中的所有异常都必须成为Java .lang的子类。虽然这可能不是一个好的实践，但你可以像这样捕获每种类型的异常:

try {
    //Stuff
} catch ( Throwable T ){
    //Doesn't matter what it was, I caught it.
}

有关更多信息，请参阅java.lang.Throwable文档。

如果您试图避免检查异常(必须显式处理的异常)，那么您将希望继承Error或RuntimeException类。

在构造函数中，可以启动一个反复调用originalThread的线程。停止(ChuckNorisException.this)

线程可以重复捕获异常，但会一直抛出异常，直到异常死亡。

实际上，公认的答案并不是那么好，因为Java需要在没有验证的情况下运行，即代码在正常情况下无法工作。

AspectJ拯救了真正的解决方案!

异常类:

package de.scrum_master.app;

public class ChuckNorrisException extends RuntimeException {
    public ChuckNorrisException(String message) {
        super(message);
    }
}

方面:

package de.scrum_master.aspect;

import de.scrum_master.app.ChuckNorrisException;

public aspect ChuckNorrisAspect {
    before(ChuckNorrisException chuck) : handler(*) && args(chuck) {
        System.out.println("Somebody is trying to catch Chuck Norris - LOL!");
        throw chuck;
    }
}

示例应用程序:

package de.scrum_master.app;

public class Application {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        catchAllMethod();
    }

    private static void catchAllMethod() {
        try {
            exceptionThrowingMethod();
        }
        catch (Throwable t) {
            System.out.println("Gotcha, " + t.getClass().getSimpleName() + "!");
        }
    }

    private static void exceptionThrowingMethod() {
        throw new ChuckNorrisException("Catch me if you can!");
    }
}

输出:

Somebody is trying to catch Chuck Norris - LOL!
Exception in thread "main" de.scrum_master.app.ChuckNorrisException: Catch me if you can!
    at de.scrum_master.app.Application.exceptionThrowingMethod(Application.java:18)
    at de.scrum_master.app.Application.catchAllMethod(Application.java:10)
    at de.scrum_master.app.Application.main(Application.java:5)

在finalize中调用System.exit(1)，并抛出来自所有其他方法的异常副本，以便程序退出。

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。

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.