On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Thomas Strunz <beginn...@hotmail.de> wrote:
> But does it enforce good/non-harmful error handling?
>
> I would say a very large amount will be infamous:
>
> try{
> ...
> } catch(Exception ex){
> }Indeed - this is possible and common. But I'd say that is the equivalent of ignoring all unchecked exceptions It seems from this thread, that this is more of a personal choice. If there are quantitative differences between the two, that'd be ncie to know. > Anyway, maybe I'm just too inexperienced to see the reason. The most > important thing for CDK is to throw exceptions more granular. If you catch a > CDKException right now I'm still pretty clueless what it actually means (IO; > AtomType,...). Definitely agree on the need for more granular exceptions -- Rajarshi Guha NIH Chemical Genomics Center ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community by Eric Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on "Lean Startup Secrets Revealed." This video shows you how to validate your ideas, optimize your ideas and identify your business strategy. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Cdk-user mailing list Cdk-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdk-user
