Hello, On Jul 06, Vincent Le Guilloux wrote: > I would also roughly go to the Nina's solution, with a strong > agreement with Rajarshi. Just a few additional word to enrich this > interesting discussion:
I also like that suggestion. > Too much exceptions handling / types usually gives verbose code (JAVA > is verbose enough hu... ;)), endless try/catch at every level of the > code, and bad performances. This reminds me the old debate about checked versus unchecked exceptions. There is a good summary about this topic: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp05254/index.html One approach would be to have both checked and unchecked exceptions in the CDK API. Checked exceptions are used only for cases where the programmer has an obvios way for recovering the exceptional situation. The rest are runtime exceptions (could inherit from CdkRuntimeException). I've observed that checked exceptions in code are rarely handled, they are usually rethrown, logged, or swallowed. Best wishes, Sulev ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 _______________________________________________ Cdk-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdk-user
