i don't think that other than a 500.js is needed. or do you have a
valid use case?
i would do the 500.js and maybe add the throwable.js if we really need it.
regards, toby
On 12/18/07, Lars Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would prefer simple names over FQ names, but perhaps checking the FQ
> name first and then the SimpleName would allow us to eliminate all
> ambiguity.
>
> regards,
>
> Lars
>
> On 18.12.2007, at 13:28, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Dec 18, 2007 1:16 PM, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> ...(1) for status codes:...
> >
> > I assume you mean status codes >= 400, right?
> >
> > I'm ok with the proposed ScriptOrServlet resolution.
> >
> >> ...(2) Likewise for Throwables it would be:
> >>
> >> Class<?> tClass = throwable.getClass();
> >> Servlet s = null;
> >> while (s == null && tClass != Object.class) {
> >> s = resolveScriptOrServlet(tClass);,,,
> >
> > Shouldn't we use Class.getSimpleName() here?So that scripts are named
> > MyFunnyException instead of com.nowhere.somepackage.MyFunnyException?
> >
> >> tClass = tClass.getSuperclass();
> >> }
> >> if (s == null) {
> >> s = defaultErrorHandlerServlet;
> >> }...
> >
> > Sounds good to me, but we'll have to be careful with exceptions that
> > occur while looking up exception scripts (I'm kind of noting the
> > obvious here ;-)
> >
> > -Bertrand
>
> --
> Lars Trieloff
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://weblogs.goshaky.com/weblogs/lars
>
>
--
-----------------------------------------< [EMAIL PROTECTED] >---
Tobias Bocanegra, Day Management AG, Barfuesserplatz 6, CH - 4001 Basel
T +41 61 226 98 98, F +41 61 226 98 97
-----------------------------------------------< http://www.day.com >---
