我会退一步考虑你为什么要这么做?我认为关键是要以不同的方式处理不同的错误。

例如，在Python中，您可以限制catch语句仅捕获MyValidationError，也许您希望能够在javascript中执行类似的操作。

catch (MyValidationError e) {
    ....
}

你不能在javascript中这样做。只有一个捕捉块。你应该对错误使用if语句来确定它的类型。

抓住(e) { 如果(isMyValidationError (e)) { .．. }其他{ //可能重新抛出? 把e; ｝ ｝

我想我会抛出一个原始对象，其中包含类型、消息和您认为合适的任何其他属性。

throw { type: "validation", message: "Invalid timestamp" }

当你捕捉到错误时:

catch(e) {
    if(e.type === "validation") {
         // handle error
    }
    // re-throw, or whatever else
}

这段代码显示了这一切。

function add(x, y) {
      if (x && y) {
        return x + y;
      } else {
        /**
         * 
         * the error thrown will be instanceof Error class and InvalidArgsError also
         */
        throw new InvalidArgsError();
        // throw new Invalid_Args_Error(); 
      }
    }

    // Declare custom error using using Class
    class Invalid_Args_Error extends Error {
      constructor() {
        super("Invalid arguments");
        Error.captureStackTrace(this);
      }
    }

    // Declare custom error using Function
    function InvalidArgsError(message) {
      this.message = `Invalid arguments`;
      Error.captureStackTrace(this);
    }
    // does the same magic as extends keyword
    Object.setPrototypeOf(InvalidArgsError.prototype, Error.prototype);

    try{
      add(2)
    }catch(e){
      // true
      if(e instanceof Error){
        console.log(e)
      }
      // true
      if(e instanceof InvalidArgsError){
        console.log(e)
      }
    }

Crescent Fresh的答案是误导性的。尽管他的警告是无效的，但还有其他一些限制他没有提到。

首先，Crescent的“警告:”段落中的推理没有意义。这种解释意味着，与多个catch语句相比，编码“一堆if (error instanceof MyError) else…”在某种程度上是累赘或冗长的。单个catch块中的多个instanceof语句与多个catch语句一样简洁——干净简洁的代码，没有任何技巧。这是模拟Java出色的特定于可抛出子类型的错误处理的好方法。

WRT“显示子类的消息属性没有得到设置”，如果使用正确构造的Error子类，则不会出现这种情况。要创建自己的ErrorX Error子类，只需复制以"var MyError ="开头的代码块，将"MyError"改为"ErrorX"。(如果您想向子类添加自定义方法，请遵循示例文本)。

The real and significant limitation of JavaScript error subclassing is that for JavaScript implementations or debuggers that track and report on stack trace and location-of-instantiation, like FireFox, a location in your own Error subclass implementation will be recorded as the instantiation point of the class, whereas if you used a direct Error, it would be the location where you ran "new Error(...)"). IE users would probably never notice, but users of Fire Bug on FF will see useless file name and line number values reported alongside these Errors, and will have to drill down on the stack trace to element #1 to find the real instantiation location.

因为JavaScript异常很难子类化，所以我不子类化。我只是创建了一个新的Exception类，并在其中使用一个Error。我修改了Error.name属性，使它看起来像我在控制台上的自定义异常:

var InvalidInputError = function(message) {
    var error = new Error(message);
    error.name = 'InvalidInputError';
    return error;
};

上面的new异常可以像普通的Error一样被抛出，它会像预期的那样工作，例如:

throw new InvalidInputError("Input must be a string");
// Output: Uncaught InvalidInputError: Input must be a string 

注意:堆栈跟踪并不是完美的，因为它只会把你带到创建新错误的地方，而不是你抛出错误的地方。这在Chrome上不是什么大问题，因为它直接在控制台中为您提供了完整的堆栈跟踪。但在Firefox上问题就更多了。

在Mohsen的回答中指出，在ES6中可以使用类来扩展错误。这要容易得多，而且它们的行为与本机错误更一致……但不幸的是，如果你需要支持前es6版本的浏览器，在浏览器中使用它并不是一件简单的事情。下面是关于如何实施的一些注意事项，但与此同时，我建议一个相对简单的方法，它包含了其他答案中的一些最好的建议:

function CustomError(message) {
    //This is for future compatibility with the ES6 version, which
    //would display a similar message if invoked without the
    //`new` operator.
    if (!(this instanceof CustomError)) {
        throw new TypeError("Constructor 'CustomError' cannot be invoked without 'new'");
    }
    this.message = message;

    //Stack trace in V8
    if (Error.captureStackTrace) {
       Error.captureStackTrace(this, CustomError);
    }
    else this.stack = (new Error).stack;
}
CustomError.prototype = Object.create(Error.prototype);
CustomError.prototype.name = 'CustomError';

在ES6中，这很简单:

class CustomError extends Error {}

...and you can detect support for ES6 classes with try {eval('class X{}'), but you'll get a syntax error if you attempt to include the ES6 version in a script that's loaded by older browsers. So the only way to support all browsers would be to load a separate script dynamically (e.g. via AJAX or eval()) for browsers that support ES6. A further complication is that eval() isn't supported in all environments (due to Content Security Policies), which may or may not be a consideration for your project.

所以现在，对于需要支持非es6浏览器的代码来说，无论是上述第一种方法，还是直接使用Error而不尝试扩展它，似乎都是最好的方法。

There is one other approach that some people might want to consider, which is to use Object.setPrototypeOf() where available to create an error object that's an instance of your custom error type but which looks and behaves more like a native error in the console (thanks to Ben's answer for the recommendation). Here's my take on that approach: https://gist.github.com/mbrowne/fe45db61cea7858d11be933a998926a8. But given that one day we'll be able to just use ES6, personally I'm not sure the complexity of that approach is worth it.

为了避免针对每种不同类型的错误的样板文件，我将一些解决方案的智慧结合到createErrorType函数中:

function createErrorType(name, init) {
  function E(message) {
    if (!Error.captureStackTrace)
      this.stack = (new Error()).stack;
    else
      Error.captureStackTrace(this, this.constructor);
    this.message = message;
    init && init.apply(this, arguments);
  }
  E.prototype = new Error();
  E.prototype.name = name;
  E.prototype.constructor = E;
  return E;
}

然后，您可以轻松地定义新的错误类型，如下所示:

var NameError = createErrorType('NameError', function (name, invalidChar) {
  this.message = 'The name ' + name + ' may not contain ' + invalidChar;
});

var UnboundError = createErrorType('UnboundError', function (variableName) {
  this.message = 'Variable ' + variableName + ' is not bound';
});