I've seen a lot of these (this and other exceptions), and they seem to be remnants from an earlier time when things worked differently. So I just remove them.
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Hanifi Gunes <[email protected]> wrote: > We now use return value as an indicator of schema change. As Steven says, > throws statement should be removed. > > On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Steven Phillips <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I think it is most likely a remnant that should be removed. > > > > On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Daniel Barclay <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > In RecordBatchLoader, the load(...) method is declared to throw > > > SchemaChangeException, but it never actually throws > > SchemaChangeException. > > > > > > It supposed to be declared to throw SchemaChangeException? (E.g., are > we > > > reserving the "right" for load(...) to throw that, and declaring > "throws > > > SchemaChangeException" to help make sure callers already handle it in > > case > > > load(...) later changes to actually throw it sometimes?) > > > > > > Or is that "throws" a remnant that should be removed sometime? > > > > > > > > > Daniel > > > -- > > > Daniel Barclay > > > MapR Technologies > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Steven Phillips > > Software Engineer > > > > mapr.com > > >
