Fedor Karpelevitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Mathieu, you have my +1 to modify the Torque Java source and Velocity >> templates to throw TorqueException instead of Exception. This is a >> fully backwards compatible change, and we can debate at length whether >> TorqueException should be a checked or unchecked exception _after_ the >> change is made. > > Just to clarify: I agree that this is good (note - i did not vote against > it). My point is that this solves only part of the problem - that is, > throwing too generic exception, but does not solve the other problem that > is, declaring implementation-specific exception in the API thus binding API > to it's particular implementation. I am afraid there would have to be a > second round of changes and I do not see why same job needs to be done > twice.
If you think more specific exceptions should be thrown, TorqueException can be extended (no signature change is necessary). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
