Jeroen Frijters writes: > [I'm resending this, apologies if you get it twice] > > Andrew Haley wrote: > > My only argument was against subclassing Error, because the Java > > specification strongly implies that the only reasonable thing to > > do when receiving an Error is issue a disgnostic and die. > > I apologize for the confusion. > > > In the case of > > unimplemented Classpath methods, this seems rather extreme. > > Why? I don't see how you can reasonably continue given that an > arbitrary functionality that the application depends on is missing.
Think about the "programming by contract" metaphor: the application is a customer, and the implementation is a contractor. It is not up to a contractor to decide whether failure to do a particular job should cause the whole project to be cancelled. That decision rests soley with the customer. That is because the contractor does not know how important a particular job is. An application can decide to carry on, and is perfectly entitled to do so. Andrew. _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath