I've still been mulling this over, despite the humour here, and I still
think that this exception handling thing is a Good Idea.
WW2/XW wouldn't need it, because the interceptors presumably would serve
the same role, but WW1 users tend to have a certain, very similar approach
to handling this
] On Behalf Of
Hani Suleiman
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Change in exception handling suggestion
ExceptionAware!
Chris Nokleberg wrote:
Joseph Ottinger wrote:
What I'd thought of was adding an extra method to Action
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Joseph Ottinger
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 6:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Change in exception handling suggestion
I've still been mulling this over, despite the humour here, and I still
think that this exception handling
]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Change in exception handling suggestion
I've still been mulling this over, despite the humour here, and I still
think that this exception handling thing is a Good Idea.
WW2/XW wouldn't need it, because the interceptors presumably would
serve
the same role, but WW1 users
: [OS-webwork] Re: Change in exception handling suggestion
Of course, this cuts both ways, I'd welcome (nay, encourage!)
submissions for patches that port 2.x features back into 1.x
On Nov 4, 2003, at 11:36 PM, Patrick Lightbody wrote:
PS: I'm against adding features to the 1.x codeline
Joseph Ottinger wrote:
What I'd thought of was adding an extra method to Action and
ActionSupport. The Action method's signature might look like this:
public String handleException(Throwable t) throws Throwable;
The ActionSupport implementation:
public String handleException(Throwable
Well, the original context was in that of WW1.3 as opposed to WW2, but
that would work as well, and certainly be more flexible, I suppose, with
nicer behaviour towards those who already implemented the pattern in their
own actions.
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Chris Nokleberg wrote:
Joseph Ottinger
ExceptionAware!
Chris Nokleberg wrote:
Joseph Ottinger wrote:
What I'd thought of was adding an extra method to Action and
ActionSupport. The Action method's signature might look like this:
public String handleException(Throwable t) throws Throwable;
The ActionSupport implementation:
public
