Anybody who has Wrox Java Server Programming J2EE Edition look at page 1079
In this session bean they consistently catch RemoteException and wrap it in
an EJBException. Is the only reason to simply not have to put
RemoteException in the signature of the implementation?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dave Wolf
> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 8:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: When do you wrap with EJBException?
>
>
> Outside of the fact that RemoteException may become deprecated in a future
> release, I dont know why you would do this. A system exception
> is a system
> exception. In remote interface still throws RemoteExcception as per the
> spec anyway.
>
> Dave Wolf
> Internet Applications Division
> Sybase
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Nicholson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 11:31 AM
> Subject: When do you wrap with EJBException?
>
>
> > Specifically when would you wrap a RemoteException with EJBException?
> >
> > Do you do this when messenging another bean and forcing the
> transactoin to
> > roll back to generating a system exception?
> >
> > Isn't Remote Exception already treated as a system exception? Why would
> you
> > catch it and wrap it and throw to the caller from within inside
> the caller
> > bean? Isn't it just because it's a RunTimeException subclass
> and you don't
> > have to put RemoteException in the throws clause?
> >
> >
> > ....
> >
> > What is the difference b/w the following?
> >
> > 1. Catching RemoteException and wrapping it in an EJBException
> > and not declaring RemoteException in the throws clause.
> >
> > 2. Declaring RemoteException in the throws clause not catching
> > RemoteException when messaging a bean inside a bean and letting
> it pass up
> > to the caller.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Either way the contain will rollback the transaction right? So is this
> just
> > a means to simply the API by not having to mention RemoteException?
> >
> > I know that the general rule is to wrap any checked exception that you
> > cannot recover from with an EJBException but why given the
> container does
> > the same thing.
> >
> >
> ==================================================================
> =========
> > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the
> body
> > of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
> >
> >
>
> ==================================================================
> =========
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include
> in the body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
