http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1167801/diff/1/2 File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/CompilingClassLoader.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1167801/diff/1/2#newcode1079 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/CompilingClassLoader.java:1079: } On 2010/12/01 19:39:30, scottb wrote:
I'm trying to figure out why this section of code is actually needed
at all.
Shouldn't the other change pretty much handle things? Trying to
figure out a
situation in which we'd want the user to see this error message as
opposed to
the other one.
You're right, it's not needed. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1167801/diff/1/2#newcode1150 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/CompilingClassLoader.java:1150: } On 2010/12/01 19:39:30, scottb wrote:
I would actually consider refactoring this method to never return
null, but
throw new ClassNotFound() instead, with an appropriate description.
I agree it makes sense to throw a new ClassNotFound() here. Due to the structure of the emma logic, I'm inclined to keep the current top level null check rather than add a half dozen to handle emma edge cases. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1167801/show -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
