On 14 March 2012 21:41, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote: > Le 14/03/2012 22:16, sebb a écrit : > > >> In which case, reversing the order would work. >> We would just have to document this as a restriction. > > > Too much burden on the user. > > > >> The problem with leaving the validation until later is that it >> decouples the cause and effect. >> This makes it a bit harder to debug. > > > It'll break one line bellow the creation of the format in 99.99% of the > cases, and the exception thrown is very explicit. > > > >> It's also simpler if there is a single validation method. >> At present some of the setters also perform validation. > > > I don't see this as an issue. > > > >> BTW, we should probably reject delimiter == DISABLED. > > > Ok > > > >> Also, the DISABLED constant needs to be public (or available via a >> public getter) otherwise it's not possible to disable all but the >> delimiter. > > > I'd better use a null value to disable a feature than exposing the DISABLED > constant.
It's not possible to use null for a char value. > > Emmanuel Bourg > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
