> This is a feature I've used in the past. > > Yes, its a very general solution, but when you want to hook into what > happens when a random exception is thrown, its a lifesaver.
the big problems I see with the implemented somultion are : - documentation is really misleading. In fact, it's a complete non sense. - either you use runtime exceptions, or not. In the second case, you should anyway catch them, so the solution is useless. In the former case, I don't see why you should catch a runtime exception - as it's a framework, I think that exceptions, if they are to be caught, should be caught at the upper level, not down in the code. Why the hell do we have to define a generic monitor which does nothing more than logging a warning ? I don't really care to keep it into the code base, I just don't see any of the advantages it brings. I may miss something ... Can you give me a clear exemple, Peter ? Thanks ! -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
