这取决于故障处理。如果你只是想跳过error元素，请尝试内部:

for(int i = 0; i < max; i++) {
    String myString = ...;
    try {
        float myNum = Float.parseFloat(myString);
        myFloats[i] = myNum;
    } catch (NumberFormatException ex) {
        --i;
    }
}

在任何其他情况下，我宁愿到外面去试试。代码更可读，更干净。如果返回null，在错误情况下抛出一个IllegalArgumentException可能会更好。

把它放在里面。您可以继续处理(如果您愿意)，也可以抛出一个有用的异常，告诉客户端myString的值和包含坏值的数组的索引。我认为NumberFormatException已经告诉您坏的值，但原则是将所有有用的数据放在您抛出的异常中。考虑一下在程序的调试器中，您会对什么感兴趣。

考虑:

try {
   // parse
} catch (NumberFormatException nfe){
   throw new RuntimeException("Could not parse as a Float: [" + myString + 
                              "] found at index: " + i, nfe);
} 

在需要的时候，您将非常感谢这样一个异常，其中包含尽可能多的信息。

As long as you are aware of what you need to accomplish in the loop you could put the try catch outside the loop. But it is important to understand that the loop will then end as soon as the exception occurs and that may not always be what you want. This is actually a very common error in Java based software. People need to process a number of items, such as emptying a queue, and falsely rely on an outer try/catch statement handling all possible exceptions. They could also be handling only a specific exception inside the loop and not expect any other exception to occur. Then if an exception occurs that is not handled inside the loop then the loop will be "preemted", it ends possibly prematurely and the outer catch statement handles the exception.

如果循环在生活中扮演清空队列的角色，那么循环很可能在队列真正清空之前就结束了。非常常见的错误。

我把0.02美元放进去。有时，您需要在稍后的代码中添加“finally”(因为谁会在第一次就写出完美的代码呢?)在这些情况下，将try/catch放在循环之外突然变得更有意义了。例如:

try {
    for(int i = 0; i < max; i++) {
        String myString = ...;
        float myNum = Float.parseFloat(myString);
        dbConnection.update("MY_FLOATS","INDEX",i,"VALUE",myNum);
    }
} catch (NumberFormatException ex) {
    return null;
} finally {
    dbConnection.release();  // Always release DB connection, even if transaction fails.
}

因为如果出现错误，您只希望释放一次数据库连接(或选择您最喜欢的其他资源类型……)。

异常的全部意义在于鼓励第一种风格:让错误处理被合并并处理一次，而不是在每个可能的错误位置立即处理。

在你的例子中没有功能上的区别。我觉得你的第一个例子可读性更强。