On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 01:31:12PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote: > On 9/10/12 11:47 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote: > > Hi > > What should I do there? > > I'm trying to work on MATH-854. It turns out that FieldElement<T>.add > > throws a NAE. Should I catch it below, and rethrow it with a more > > detailed message (including the entry index)? > > IMO, yes. > > I would also check v itself and add to the javadoc contract that IAE > is thrown if v is null. This is not consistently done in [math], > though, and rarely in the linear package, so I am OK just letting > the NPE propagate if v is null. It is a little awkward that v > itself being null leads to NPE, but a component of it null leads to > MIAE.
Awkward? Of course it is; that's what I explained two posts ago. If we want to allow for the possibility of checking for null (and I agree that it could be useful to pinpoint the problem by passing the information about which index contains an invalid null entry), then we should adopt the second option which I presented in that preceding post: "NullArgumentException" inherits from "NullPointerException" This really solves all issues (now that Luc has said that it is not a problem if this one exception escapes the single-root hierarchy): It allows to check for null in CM code and raise the same kind of exception that would arise when no null check is performed. Both flexible and consistent. Gilles > [...] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
