On Jan 12, 2007, at 11:05 AM, Karan Malhi wrote:
So for something like below, should i be throwing a
InternalErrorException?
Where is the InternalErrorException class?
private static void checkPermissions(File file) {
if (!file.canRead())
throw new RuntimeException("The file " +
file.getAbsolutePath()
+ " does not have read permissions. Please add read permission");
if (!file.canWrite()) {
throw new RuntimeException("The file " +
file.getAbsolutePath()
+ " does not have write permissions. Please add write permission");
}
}
There is no InternalErrorException clas, Alan is just confusing you :)
But in general, patches don't have to be absolutely perfect all the
time. If in doubt, make a judgment call of your own and submit the
patch (provided it basically works). When you do, maybe make a note
on the dev list or the jira asking for feedback on places you have
doubts in.
-David
On 1/12/07, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 5, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2007, at 9:23 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> We throw a number of vanilla RuntimeExceptions. Should we not
>> build a few OpenEJB exceptions on top of these?
>
> I agree that vanilla RuntimeExceptions are bad, but I think we
> should be careful when replacing these. In general, I think we
> should favor the standard Java exception classes like NullPointer,
> IllegalArgument, and IllegalState. I hope we can avoid the
> coupling that happened in Geronimo when we had lots of "common"
> exceptions in the geronimo-common module.
Agreed. Useful and informative runtime exceptions should be left as
is. But, I also think that we should wrap exceptions that would make
no sense to the bean developer. For example, when calling a session
context getBusinessObject, that method could theoretically throw an
IllegalAccessException when it returns a proxy to the business
object. I think that it should be wrapped with another runtime
exception such as InternalErrorException.
Regards,
Alan
--
Karan Malhi
