Yes, returning a null value is perfectly acceptable. It indicates to the AuthenticationManager to try another resolver if one is available.
-Scott On Jan 29, 2008 3:28 AM, ssozonoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > Sure and I was not implying that throwing an IOException was acceptable > what > I meant was that other than returning a null for the principle I see no > way > of indicating a failure. > > So is returning a null value for the Principle is acceptable? > > Thanks, > Serge > > > > scott_battaglia wrote: > > > > An exception like an IOException is specific to the implementation of > the > > resolver (not all of them would need to do this). In addition, any > > handling > > of that exception would only be able to occur within that resolver (as > > none > > of the items that call it assume that resolvers require IO operations). > > Anything that couldn't be handled by the resolver is something that most > > likely could not be handled at all and thus would be a RuntimeException > > (which are generally not declared in the signature as you do not want to > > force people to catch something they probably won't be able to handle. > > > > -Scott > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/method-resolvePrincipal-of-Interface-CredentialsToPrincipleResolver-not-throwing-an-Exception--tp15148341p15154651.html > Sent from the CAS Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > cas-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev > -- -Scott Battaglia LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/scottbattaglia
_______________________________________________ cas-dev mailing list [email protected] http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev
