Hi Luc.
> Author: luc
> Date: Sun Nov 14 15:06:11 2010
> New Revision: 1035003
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1035003&view=rev
> Log:
> fixed message building so the behavior matches the existing javadoc:
> general arguments are the ones remaining after the specific ones have been
> h
Le 14/11/2010 21:57, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
> Hi Luc.
Hi Gilles,
>
>> Author: luc
>> Date: Sun Nov 14 15:06:11 2010
>> New Revision: 1035003
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1035003&view=rev
>> Log:
>> fixed message building so the behavior matches the existing javadoc:
>> general
Le 14/11/2010 22:19, Luc Maisonobe a écrit :
> Le 14/11/2010 21:57, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>> Hi Luc.
>
> Hi Gilles,
>
>>
>>> Author: luc
>>> Date: Sun Nov 14 15:06:11 2010
>>> New Revision: 1035003
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1035003&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> fixed message build
Hi.
> > [...]
> >
> > I'll revert the change and make the javadoc match the earlier code.
>
> It should be fixed now, in r1035072 and r1035073.
Thank you.
> I left the other change (allowing either specific or general to be null)
> as I still consider its worth providing both ways.
I don't un
Le 14/11/2010 23:22, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
> Hi.
Hi,
>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I'll revert the change and make the javadoc match the earlier code.
>>
>> It should be fixed now, in r1035072 and r1035073.
>
> Thank you.
>
>> I left the other change (allowing either specific or general to be null)
Hi.
> [...]
>
> So what I propose the following set of constructors :
> - no argument
> -> this would lead to the default message USER_EXCEPTION
> - a throwable
> -> this would lead to the default message USER_EXCEPTION
> - a throwable and one pattern
> -> this would be used to
