According to "Effective Java", it is a better practice to throw an exception rather than return null. This book makes for good reading. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vilya Harvey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [OT] How to tell when a project you are on is in trouble
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Call me crazy, but I can see how this may be useful. > > You're crazy. :-) > > > NullPointerException on its own subclasses RuntimeException. This means > > that you are not required to "catch" runtime exceptions or declare them > > with a "throws" clause of a method. > > Bruce Eckel (author of "Thinking in Java") posted an interesting article on > his website a short while back, discussing whether checked exceptions in > general are actually a good idea. The article is at > http://www.mindview.net/Etc/Discussions/CheckedExceptions > if you're interested. I'm still not sure whether I agree with the authors > conclusions, but it's interesting to think about. > > > But there are times where having an object be null may have a meaning > other > > than a bug in the code - for example you may read from some third-party > > library that returns a null object as a valid response. If that happens, > > you may need to catch it or declare it in a throws clause. > > NullPointerException won't enforce this becaue it subclasses > > RuntimeException. > > I can see where you're coming from with this, but if null is a valid return > value then surely that means it's not an exceptional condition? In that > case, the right thing to do is to check whether the return value is null > rather than waiting for an exception to be thrown... > > Cheers, > Vil. > -- > Vilya Harvey, Consultant > [EMAIL PROTECTED] / digital steps / > (W) +44 (0)1483 469 480 > (M) +44 (0)7816 678 457 http://www.digitalsteps.com/ > > --Disclaimer-- > > This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential and/or legally > privileged. If you have received this email and you are not a named > addressee, please inform the sender at Digital Steps Ltd by phone on > +44 (0)1483 469 480 or by reply email and then delete the email from > your system. If you are not a named addressee you must not use, > disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email. Although > Digital Steps Ltd routinely screens for viruses, addressees should > check this email and any attachments for viruses. Digital Steps Ltd > makes no representation or warranty as to the absence of viruses in this > email or any attachments. > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>