Ola Bini wrote:
Just noticed a thing, thanks to John Lam. Our JumpExceptions derive from
RuntimeException. That means that code that will catch(Exception) will
stop flow control, if it happens at the wrong place. To get around this,
I believe we should consider going to have JumpExceptions base
Hmm, I'd be a little careful with this, as it can obscure the source of
failures when code elsewhere (naively?) assumes that its catch (Exception)
clause will catch everything. (Ola, you may recall that I tracked down a
byte-code generation bug in JavaProxyClassFactory that had remained
unresolve
On 7/25/07, Nick Sieger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/24/07, Ola Bini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just noticed a thing, thanks to John Lam. Our JumpExceptions derive from
> RuntimeException. That means that code that will catch(Exception) will
> stop flow control, if it happens at the wrong
On 7/24/07, Ola Bini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just noticed a thing, thanks to John Lam. Our JumpExceptions derive from
RuntimeException. That means that code that will catch(Exception) will
stop flow control, if it happens at the wrong place. To get around this,
I believe we should consider go
Just noticed a thing, thanks to John Lam. Our JumpExceptions derive from
RuntimeException. That means that code that will catch(Exception) will
stop flow control, if it happens at the wrong place. To get around this,
I believe we should consider going to have JumpExceptions based on
java.lang.E
