On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 06:18, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Peter Donald wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Apr 2002 03:45, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > > Can somebody tell me why we have to: > > > > > > 1) create three strings > > > 2) call two methods > > > 3) create an exception object > > > 4) throw the exception > > > 5) and then throw everything away. > > > > > > in order to resort to the default value? > > > > Its legacy inherited from previous authors ;) > > > :-)
:) > > I fixed this up in CVS but similar ineficiancies are present with many of > > the getAttribute*() methods. It would be good if a patch was supplied to > > rectify this ;) > > My suggestion would be *not* to use wrap the default-lacking methods in > the abstract classes but provide different methods for the empty methods > (which trigger an exception if the configuration isn't found) and for > those with have the default passed (which never trigger an exception). agreed. -- Cheers, Pete It said "Don't Panic" in big friendly letters. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
