On Jun 3, 2010, at 2:15 PM, Felix Knecht wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> We have a lot of following constructs:
>
> log.error( I18n.err( I18n.ERR_04007 ) );
> throw new DecoderException( I18n.err( I18n.ERR_04007 ) );
>
> What about logging the exception within the exception itself like
>
> public DecoderException(String message)
> {
> super( message );
> log.error( message );
> }
>
>
> This will avoid having log.error all over the place and the translation
> must be done only once instead of twice like above.
This is not a very good pattern for a number of reasons.
First, you cannot control logging at the source of the error. Admittedly this
is an error message but I have run into times where I want to turn off the
klaxon to see what the real problem is.
Second, constructors should not have side effects. It's never a good idea.
Third, I never log an error if I am throwing an exception. It just adds noise.
I will, however, log additional useful information that is not in the
exception message. Just parroting what's in the exception is of little value.
Finally, what the heck is ERR_04007? :) I thought there already was a
discussion and community consensus about how there is little to negative value
in using numbers as error messages. Maybe I missed the conversation where this
opinion was reversed. If so, ignore this bit. :)
Regards,
Alan
