I think "super" example is just one specific case of breaking *any* caller (not just a subclass) that calls the the modified method. I.e., should we add the exception to *all* methods (in any other class) that call this method? I think that really needs to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
-Alex Dommasch dimiter wrote: >>No. But do you think that there should be? Java allows to have less >> > "throws" > >>arguments in descendants, so this shouldn't break anything. >> > > It would break the compilation if some of the descendant classes calls > super.xxx() > Still I don't think that it's a big deal, but can you just display a warning > and perhaps a list of the methods where the method is called as super? > > I imagine something like this: > > 1. I type the throws statement. > 2. Press Alt+Enter > 3. The exception is added to the signature of the current method > 3.a. If the method is overriding or implementing method from interface, > ask for confirmation and add the exception to the superclass too. > 3.b. If the method is called using the 'super' qualifier from the descendent > classes > Display a list in the find tab, giving all such ocurrences. > > > -- dimiter > > > _______________________________________________ Eap-bugs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.jetbrains.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-bugs
