Do you think we need to go through the trouble of throwing an IllegalArgumentException if it's not a well-formed class name (starts with character, blah blah blah)? Or, can we just let it throw a ClassNotFoundException after doing as much as we can with the string that's passed in (i.e. transforming it into the proper format)?
-----Original Message----- From: Thomas Dudziak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 10:39 AM To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [lang] enhanced version of Class.forName On 9/6/05, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. Well, it's not exactly the same thing. I'm talking about when they pass > in just "boolean" or "int". In that case, we construct the name "[B" or > "[I" and pass that to Class.forName() with the "initialize" parameter, > thereby telling it whether to initialize the array class and not > (necessarily) the component type class. If I understand the VM spec correctly, the initialization is recursively applied to the component type: http://java.sun.com/docs/books/vmspec/2nd-edition/html/ConstantPool.doc.html #79473 > 2. Your parsing code didn't support the "proper" type format for arrays. > We want this method to do so. If you want me to, I can enhance it accordingly this evening. Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
