Oh - okay. I get it now - my mistake. Don't know what I was thinking when I implemented this ;/
It is fixed so it will actually throw the correct exception now ;) On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 10:48, Peter Donald wrote: > On Sat, 20 Oct 2001 19:26, Paul Hammant wrote: > > Peter, > > > > >> You can ask the InvokationTargetException what exception it contains. > > >> You just have to code in such a way that you know a proxy exists. > > > > > > (forgive my naivety here...) but why do we have these proxies in the > > > first place? If I the block author is using a service that throws a > > > checked exception, why should I have to trap the checked exception > > > *AND* an InvocationTargetException and check to see if its contained > > > exception is the one i'm trapping? That seems to be a burden to me. > > > -pete > > > > I think the promise turned out not to be true. With BCEL replacement it > > could be perfect. > > Sorry - I still have no idea what the actual problem is. Can someone > enlighten me ... perhaps with test code ? ;) -- Cheers, Pete *------------------------------------------------* | You can't wake a person who is pretending | | to be asleep. -Navajo Proverb. | *------------------------------------------------* --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
