"JDM" == John D Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JDM> (E) I suggest that you "homogenize" your constructors' declared
JDM> exceptions. I.e., make all of them throw the same set of
JDM> exceptions. The easy way to get into this habit is to just go one
JDM> single step further than you
I don't know enough about when and when not this() is allowed. But
from my basic understanding of exceptions, and after some coding
exercise, I am confused.
First, you have:
Jim Hazen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ExampleService(String host, int timeout)
> {//impl here}
This signature require
> "Jim" == Jim Hazen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> In any case, the compiler (Blackdown 1.3.1 FCS) then returned with an
> error saying that the call to 'this' must be the first statement in the
> constructor (apparently the 'try' is now the first statement and this
> isn't allowed).
>
> "Jim" == Jim Hazen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> In any case, the compiler (Blackdown 1.3.1 FCS) then returned with an
> error saying that the call to 'this' must be the first statement in the
> constructor (apparently the 'try' is now the first statement and this
> isn't allowed).
>
Hi all,
I came across something a little odd today. I normally have various signatures
to my object constructors, and I usually write one and then use this() from
within the others to make minor changes. Like below.
ExampleService(String host, int timeout)
{//impl here}
ExampleService(String
Isn't time that Sun opened up the license now like Netscape have with
MOZILLA .
I think it [Sun] is going to start demoralising developers.
Just was reading the Lutris Enhydra issue, trying to get certification for
open source J2EE applicationserver, on onjava.com Mike Loukides.
--
Peter Pilgri
