On 10/25/05, Mihai Manuta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And nothing prevents you from throwing an exception after you > see there's no spouse - for the particular case of object that > should have one.
I think that's Barney's point. If you're going to call getSpouse(), you should already know that the person has a spouse. You shouldn't call getSpouse() and then check the result to see if a the person had a spouse. Nor should you call getSpouse() and look for an exception to let you know that person didn't have a spouse. Patrick -- Patrick McElhaney 704.560.9117 http://pmcelhaney.weblogs.us ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). CFCDev is supported by New Atlanta, makers of BlueDragon http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/index.cfm An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
