> -----Original Message----- > From: matthew.hawthorne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 3:04 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [lang] [proposal] NotImplementedException with a Throwable > cause > > > Alban Peignier wrote: > > I used before a private NotYetImplementedException. I'm refactoring my > > code to use the lang.NotImplementedException. One of my previous use > > cases is no longer possible : > > > > try { > > ... > > } catch (... e) { > > throw new NotImplentedException("... <case description> ...", e); > > } > > > > Does this usage seem useful for most of people ? > > > While I can't say that I would use it in the same way, I can see your > point here -- the > exception is thrown to indicate a portion of code that hasn't been > written yet. I find myself > stubbing things out in a similar way very frequently. > > Any [lang] folks have a problem with this being added?
Any reason you couldn't just use java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException? It extends RuntimeException, so you don't have to change the method signature when you do add the implementation. -- Martin Cooper > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
