Yep. That's my approach.
> Guys If you don't know how to handle exception for a given method then
> you are better off simply throwing it.
This sentence may confuse some who will assume they have to catch it
in the first place. Maybe a better phrase is:
"If you don't know how to handle exception for a given method then
just don't catch it."
Hey, I just had an idea. Why not compile this with Reinier's
checkless compiler, jar it up and include it in your normal projects..
public class Throw {
public static void unchecked(Throwable throwable) {
throw throwable;
}
}
all you need to do, where you would normally wrap the exception in a
runtime exception is do this..
public void method() {
try {
...
} catch (SQLException sqle) {
Throw.unchecked(sqle);
}
}
On Aug 21, 6:30 pm, "a.efremov" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Let me to say what I think on that topic.
> Guys If you don't know how to handle exception for a given method then
> you are better off simply throwing it. Just add it to the method
> declaration. That's all about that.
> Handle only exceptions in case you are know for sure how to deal with
> a failure/error.
>
> In some cases you can simply wrap an exception into RuntimeException.
> It sounds like you convert it to an error intentionally. kinda
> exception handling. It makes sense for wealth of situations.
>
> Don't write useless boilerplate code that in many cases is cause of an
> error. Keep the things as simple as there are.
>
> alexander
>
> On Aug 18, 4:55 am, Christian Catchpole <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > No, i just let that go up. I really try to avoid the declare as null
> > then set thingy.
>
> > On Aug 18, 12:03 pm, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > You neglect to handle the checked exception declared by
> > > prepareStatement no?
>
> > > PreparedStatement stmt = null;
> > > try{
> > > stmt = connection.prepareStatement(sql);
> > > final ResultSet rs = stmt.executeQuery();
> > > try{
> > > while (rs.next()){
> > > // Stuff...
> > > {
> > > }
> > > finally{
> > > rs.close();
> > > }}
>
> > > catch(SQLException e){
> > > // Logging...}
>
> > > finally{
> > > try{
> > > stmt.close();
> > > }
> > > catch(SQLException whoTheFuckCares){
> > > };
>
> > > }
>
> > > Really, how many other ways are there to do it I wonder now? (Apart
> > > from wrapping certain things, like the last try-catch clause in some
> > > general purpose "closer util"?).
>
> > > /Casper
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
