[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:43:00 +0200
Per Bothner wrote:
> >>We discussed this in March, and there was agreement that we
> >>should use use UnsupportedOperationException.
> >>See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2003-03/msg00016.html
> > Its never too late to rethink something.
> But unless one is aware of previous discussion (and even if one is),
> much time may be wasted. So far I haven't seen any reason why we
> need to re-consider the previous consensus.
I just re-read the previous discussion and there Andrew Haley wrote:
> UnsupportedOperationException is a good choice. Any subclass of
> Error is not, because according to the spec Error "indicates
> serious problems that a reasonable application should not try to
IMNSHO, this is *exactly* why we must define a new exception derived
from Error. An unimplemented method *is* a serious problem that a
reasonable application should not try to catch.
So, I think it is an extremely bad idea to use
UnsupportedOperationException (or a subclass of it).
RE: NYIException, Regier Avery J, 2003/09/26
Re: NYIException, Dalibor Topic, 2003/09/27
Jeroen Frijters <=
RE: NYIException, Jeroen Frijters, 2003/09/27
RE: NYIException, Jeroen Frijters, 2003/09/28