[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DBCP-310?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12783326#action_12783326
]
Phil Steitz commented on DBCP-310:
----------------------------------
I guess I am OK with the backwards compatible change to SQLNestedException, but
want to keep the deprecation and not increase its use as we should remove it in
2.0. Given that, its probably not worth the effort.
Regarding your comments on API contract and breakage, I agree in principle, but
I can imagine scenarios where your second bullet could lead to badness -
exceptions propagating up the stack when they could have been handled. Your
third bullet is valid, but not for a .x release that we want to be a drop-in
replacement. So basically, I am still in agreement with your former self on
this ;)
> SQLNestedException & use of initCause() with SQLException
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DBCP-310
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DBCP-310
> Project: Commons Dbcp
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Niall Pemberton
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.3, 1.4
>
> Attachments: DBCP-310-v2.patch, SQLNestedException.patch
>
>
> SQLNestedException in its current state is a hangover from supporting JDK 1.3
> when there was no "initCause()" method. This implementation can now be
> greatly simplified with DBCP now having a minimum of JDK 1.4
> Also SQLNestedException is deprecated and the following code has been used in
> a number of places
> {code}
> throw (SQLException )new SQLException(message).initCause(e)
> {code}
> DBCP is inconsistent though - sometimes using the above and sometimes using
> SQLNestedException. IMO SQLNestedException should be un-deprecated and used
> consistently everywhere - its now a simple implementation and I think the
> code is cleaner using it rather than the above.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
