> Chris Gray wrote:
More generally, from a performance point of view it is best not to write
if (index < 0 || index >= array.length || etc. etc.) {
throw new FooIndexOutOfBoundsException();
}
if there is a method call or an array access which will throw the exception
anyway. (Many null parameter checks can be omitted for the same reason).
Looks like Sun have followed this policy, and dealt with the not-quite-right
exception type by fudging the spec to throw the common supertype. :->
That hits the point. What RI throws is natural, just because they write
that way. However we will never know what RI writes, we just implement
the spec in our way, that's why there are many
if(...){
throw new exception();
}
and
try{
...
}catch(){
throw new exception();
}
in Harmony.
After all, our mission is to make it compatible, right? :)
Chris
On Friday 12 May 2006 09:11, Mikhail Fursov wrote:
Note that this is not only "beautiful" but also performance oriented way ->
do not create extra rethrows if it's possible
On 5/12/06, Semukhina, Elena V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To have a "beautiful" fix, why don't you just write
System.arraycopy(data, start, value, 0, count);
without trying to catch any exception and rethrow another one?
ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException, if happened, would be thrown by
System.arraycopy().
--
Best Regards!
Jimmy, Jing Lv
China Software Development Lab, IBM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
