On Nov 17, 2008, at 1:20 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:
That's the guy behind the famous "Don’t swallow", right?
This is slightly different, though ... I think everyone's onboard
with not swallowing exceptions. I'm talking about chaining
exceptions appropriately. But the problem is that if you only throw
RuntimeExceptions, the people below you have no idea what you might
throw and therefore have no idea when they need to catch and
rethrow, which makes it kind of weird trying to do this effectively
with only Runtimes. So my comment about Chuck was that he doesn't
agree with CHECKED exceptions.
What I don't like is checked exceptions that you can't do anything
about and having to add throws to each method up until WO takes over
and shows it on an error page. Adds clutter with no value. Wastes my
time. I do frequently use RuntimeException subclasses which (unlike
Exception subclasses) are not checked but can be differentiated. At
the point where they no longer add value, I just them bubble up. I
also convert checked exceptions into unchecked ones if I can't do
anything meaningful with them.
In is particular case, what would have been useful is an unchecked
exception that said, "Error instantiating com.foo.bar.SomeComponent:
'java.io.UnsupportedEncodingException: NSMacOSRomanStringEncoding'"
with the original exception chained. I don't see the value in a
checked exception here, just more information.
Chuck
--
Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
