Le 03/05/2011 12:03, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 01:08:29AM +0200, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
[...]
Consistency implies that *all* exceptions thrown from CM must behave the
same way. I thus propose to add an interface like (maybe a better name?):
---
interface ContextedExcepti
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 01:08:29AM +0200, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >>Consistency implies that *all* exceptions thrown from CM must behave the
> > >>same way. I thus propose to add an interface like (maybe a better name?):
> > >>---
> > >>interface ContextedException {
> > >> void ad
> > [...]
> >>Consistency implies that *all* exceptions thrown from CM must behave the
> >>same way. I thus propose to add an interface like (maybe a better name?):
> >>---
> >>interface ContextedException {
> >> void addMessage(Localizable pattern,
> >> Object ... arguments);
>
Le 02/05/2011 17:07, Phil Steitz a écrit :
On 5/1/11 3:02 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:34:31AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 5/1/11 6:00 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700
On 5/1/11 3:02 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:34:31AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 5/1/11 6:00 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 4/30/
On 5/2/11 1:38 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 03:18:20PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 5/1/11 2:29 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:11:00AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 5/1/11 3:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:3
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 03:18:20PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 5/1/11 2:29 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:11:00AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >> On 5/1/11 3:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 4/30/
On 5/1/11 2:29 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:11:00AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 5/1/11 3:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:34:31AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 5/1/11 6:00 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >>> On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:11:00AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 5/1/11 3:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >> On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:08AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Convert
On 5/1/11 6:00 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:08AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Convert
On 5/1/11 3:48 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:08AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
Converting some of my code to use trunk, I discovered that the
binomialCo
Le 01/05/2011 15:00, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:08AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
Converting some
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:08AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > >> Converting some of my code to use trunk, I discove
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:53:30PM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:08AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >> Converting some of my code to use trunk, I discovered that the
> >> binomialCoefficient methods no longer throw IllegalArgu
On 4/30/11 4:33 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:08AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> Converting some of my code to use trunk, I discovered that the
>> binomialCoefficient methods no longer throw IllegalArgumentException
>> when parameters are invalid.
> The consensus was a s
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 09:10:08AM -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Converting some of my code to use trunk, I discovered that the
> binomialCoefficient methods no longer throw IllegalArgumentException
> when parameters are invalid.
The consensus was a singly rooted hierarchy ("MathRuntimeException").
Fine for me
Luc
Phil Steitz a écrit :
Converting some of my code to use trunk, I discovered that the
binomialCoefficient methods no longer throw IllegalArgumentException when
parameters are invalid. The javadoc asserts that MathIllegalArgumentException
will be thrown in these cases, but tha
Converting some of my code to use trunk, I discovered that the
binomialCoefficient methods no longer throw IllegalArgumentException
when parameters are invalid. The javadoc asserts that
MathIllegalArgumentException will be thrown in these cases, but that
is not correct, since what is actually thro
19 matches
Mail list logo
