Hi! Am 25.10.2010 um 21:13 schrieb "James Carman" <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Gary Gregory > <ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com> wrote: >> >> So for VFS, you would prefer that all error handling be done with unchecked >> > > In a nutshell, yes. So, it's a pretty easy change. You'd just change > the superclass of FileSystemException. To bring in my two 2ct. I foo think that the FileSystemException could be a runtime exception. As long as it represents a non-recoverable exception. Something which might throw things like a filenotfoundexception should be checked, still. What I would like to say is, simply changing the exception inheritance is not sufficient and for no ones help. We need to work out a concept which method throws which checked or unchecked exception. As we had Hibernate in the thread, I think Hibernate has gone too far in this question and you have to be very familiar with the API to know which exception to catch when. This does not help if you are going to translate a technical exception to something meaningful for the user. The problem with VFS is that it throws mostly just a FSE without any chance to get the real cause in you program - you have to parse the message - which is bad. Ciao, Mario > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
