Mailing-List: contact notifications-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@ant.apache.org
From: bugzilla@apache.org
To: notifications@ant.apache.org
Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4752] Make Ant report an error when an undefined
 property is referenced.
In-Reply-To: <bug-4752-48744@https.issues.apache.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-4752-48744@https.issues.apache.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20081030143302.74FCF234C24E@brutus.apache.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 07:33:02 -0700 (PDT)

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4752


--- Comment #4 from Ville Oikarinen <ville@oikarinen.org>  2008-10-30 07:33:01 PST ---
Thanks Matt, but we are not there yet.

The apidoc at

http://www.dpml.net/api/ant/1.6.4/org/apache/tools/ant/PropertyHelper.html#getUserProperty(java.lang.String,
java.lang.String)

seems to point at the method responsible for resolving a property. But the
contract seems to be to return null for undefined properties.

Maybe I should overrid this method like this:
public java.lang.Object getUserProperty(java.lang.String ns,
                                        java.lang.String name) {
  Object retval = super.getUserProperty(ns,name);
  if(retval == null) throw new SomeException();
  else return retval;
}

How will this contract violation work (now and in the future)? What should
SomeException be? Etc. Seems that it's the caller's responsibility to handle
null in a different way.

Besides, the apidoc starts with "NOT FINAL. API MAY CHANGE". Doesn't sound like
fun to customize this, does it :)


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.