DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36231>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36231 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-18 21:45 ------- Joshua Bloch recommended making the same change to ServletException as Gili just did, back in 2000, in anticipation of j2se1.4. Too bad it was ignored, probably because Joshua Bloch doesn't know anything about Java. http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4395719 Fixing this bug will not violate the spec. Calling getCause() is undefined behavior. It would be more useful if it did the right thing instead of the wrong thing. Furthermore, just because it doesn't violate the servlet spec doesn't mean its not a bug. That is a ridiculous position to take. According to the java spec, if I am using 1.4 or later, getCause() does the following: - Returns the cause of this throwable or null if the cause is nonexistent or unknown. - By returning null, ServletException is implying that the cause is nonexistent or unknown, which is not true. ServletException doesn't adhere to the java spec, and that is definitely a bug. Here is another snippet from the javadoc for Throwable.getCause(): - While it is typically unnecessary to override this method, a subclass can override it to return a cause set by some other means. This is appropriate for a "legacy chained throwable" that predates the addition of chained exceptions to Throwable. - -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
