Larry Stone wrote: > It _should_ never get an NPE over a missing configuration key. Given > our sparse testing resources it behooves us to make the code as > resilient as possible.
I'll disagree slightly - it isn't necessarily wrong for code to blow up. In cases like this, it's probably better for the code to blow up, than to quietly pretend to work, with only a vigilant pair of eyes on the log file realising if it isn't. But it should blow up with something more useful than an NPE - testing the returned value for null, or catching the NPE and rethrowing a more descriptive exception. G This email has been scanned by Postini. For more information please visit http://www.postini.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ DSpace-tech mailing list DSpace-tech@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-tech
