Sean Legassick wrote:
> On 2000.12.05 22:50:38 +0000 John McNally wrote:
> > I would vote for having exceptions thrown up to the Turbine Servlet
> > where they could be handled uniformly.
>
> +1
This is the approach I would prefer to take. Looks like the idea has
three +1s.
I'll implement it this way.
> > But that may not be practical,
> > since you generally want to log at a certain priority. Maybe the
> > logging should be done locally, but the exceptions should always be
> > passed on to Turbine.java for final handling.
>
> Perhaps the TurbineException class could contain a priority field filled by
> constants from a standardised Log implementation...?
>
> Or maybe that's too much interdependence...?
And how should that work? Take the highest priorty of the
TurbineExceptions
in the chain, and then compare to the loggers level of verbosity?
I might implement that, but I feel it's kind of an overkill. The
exceptions
that are considered normal during the operation of the application
should
be caught, others should be passed to the Turbine servlet, and the
administrator
should know about those. This seems to be good enough for me.
> > What is your (and others) inclination?
>
> I think that Exceptions should be propogated up. Also I would like the
> ability to plug in an exception handler that Turbine.java would call - that
> way I could arrange to mail reports to an administrator etc. Should be easy
> with a TR property specifying a class that implements a standard interface.
+1
Rafal
--
Rafal Krzewski
Senior Internet Developer
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+48 22 8534830 http://e-point.pl
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
