What is the reason for prohibiting throwing a sub-class?
Every existing try... catch construction will work
Do we really want to convert all tests like
try {
do something
fail();
} catch (SomeException e) {
//expected
}
to something like
try {
do something
fail();
} catch (SomeException e) {
assertEquals(SomeException.class, e.getClass());
}
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/5/11, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
George Harley wrote:
>
> * Little old me thinks that there *is* a problem here but that the
> solution is to do as the RI does and throw exceptions with the very same
> runtime type as the RI. That's based on my interpretation of the
> exception-throwing compatibility guidelines [2], in particular the
> fragment "Harmony class library code should throw exceptions of the same
> type as the RI".
+1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
