On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Timo Kinnunen <timo.kinnu...@gmail.com> wrote: > This seems problematic to me, because it breaks the expectation that the > most important part of the stack trace can be found at the bottom of the it. > In this case, if someone subsequently wraps the original exception in their > own Exception the causal chain then gets jumbled. I actually wish > printStackTrace processed the exceptions in the main trace in reverse > compared to how it is now. If, rather than finding this at the end of a > stack trace:
Timo, this is a new idea to me - I always read stacktraces "from the top". But I've never had to debug those large java apps that real java programmers maintain. I like having the top exception be the "real" one instead of one we fabricated to help the user. I think now I finally understand weird stacktraces in forkjoin tests that came from ForkJoinTask.getThrowableException where I was wondering why the exception appeared to be repeated and why the exception message was missing.
