> Okay..what is the alternative?

Just ... open the file and handle the error?

What are you getting by checking that the file exists that you don't get from the 'file not found' error that the `openFile()` routine returns?

Because it doesn't matter if `doesFileExist()` returns true, you still have to handle the `file not found` error[1] when calling `openFile()` on the next line anyway.

[1] Just because the file exists when the program checked, that doesn't mean that the program can open it (permissions), that the file still exists (could have been removed between the call to check and the call to open), that the file is, in fact, a file that can be opened (and not a directory, for example), that the file is not exclusively locked (Windows) by some other process that opened it, etc. `doesFileExist()` tells you nothing that would change how the subsequent is written.

That makes sense.

I guess we’re accustomed to thinking that absence of a file is not “exception-worthy” because it is expected under normal circumstances. But the cases you raised make sense.

And if it's the initial configuration file?

> And if it's the initial configuration file?

You're still going to have to open it and handle the errors (in case it's the wrong permissions, or the filename is a directory, etc).

Checking if it exists doesn't make the subsequent code any easier or shorter - you still have to check for errors even if it exists.