On 17/04/2007, at 2:30 AM, Dennis Birch wrote: > I think it's a perfect solution for a situation where I'm creating new > objects in a loop, and I want to test for them individually (in case > there's one bad record in a bunch). In that case, a custom > RuntimeException by itself terminates the method. This should allow me > to test for a nil object in those cases so as to continue
It shouldn't if you have a local Try Catch around the new Thingy that's raising the exception. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
