Ugo Cei <u.cei <at> cbim.it> writes: > > But the proposal cries IMHO for unforeseen > > effects like not caught exceptions where they should have been caught. > > If all you do is log (maybe) and rethrow, this is a clear indication of > the fact that the exception should NOT have been caught in the first place.
Agreed. > > And for the specific case of ProcessingExceptions: Does not almost every of > > our components have the ProcessingException in its throws clause? So where is > > the need for catching/wrapping/rethrowing them?? Only current bad usage is > > not a reason for changing it IMO. > > The compiler forces you to catch them. Of course, but only exactly once at the end. How are the exceptions made available to handle-errors at the moment? I guess somewhere in the tree processor. So where is the problem letting it catch the exception? I still don't see the need for the re-parenting. Joerg
