cocoon-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From d...@cocoon.apache.org
Subject [Cocoon Wiki] Updated: ButterflyManifesto
Date Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:37:38 GMT
   Date: 2004-08-11T06:37:37
   Editor: VadimGritsenko <vgritsenko@apache.org>
   Wiki: Cocoon Wiki
   Page: ButterflyManifesto
   URL: http://wiki.apache.org/cocoon/ButterflyManifesto

   no comment

Change Log:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@@ -86,9 +86,9 @@
 
 Checked exceptions do more harm than good, so it would be wise to avoid them altogether.
Design instead a hierarchy of runtime exceptions and, whenever you need to catch an exception
thrown by a third party library, decide whether you can handle it locally. If you cannot,
wrap it in a runtime exception and throw the latter.
 
-Niclas Hedhman: If everyone follows this rule, then we don't know when there are exceptions
to catch, no situations you try to recover from, and we will have runtime unstable systems.
Sorry, I don't buy this argument for a second. Programmers need to do there job, not ignore
it for the 'time being' as lazy developers will definately do otherwise. Perhaps you can get
away with this in a request/response system like Cocoon, but a general recommendation that
nothing should throw checked Exception is foolish.
+''Niclas Hedhman'': If everyone follows this rule, then we don't know when there are exceptions
to catch, no situations you try to recover from, and we will have runtime unstable systems.
Sorry, I don't buy this argument for a second. Programmers need to do there job, not ignore
it for the 'time being' as lazy developers will definately do otherwise. Perhaps you can get
away with this in a request/response system like Cocoon, but a general recommendation that
nothing should throw checked Exception is foolish.
 
-Ugo: I invite everyone to read what others have to say on the subject, then make up your
mind:
+''Ugo'': I invite everyone to read what others have to say on the subject, then make up your
mind:
 
  * [http://www.mindview.net/Etc/Discussions/CheckedExceptions]
  * [http://www.artima.com/intv/jdom3.html]
@@ -97,6 +97,10 @@
  * [http://www.artima.com/intv/solid.html]
 
 After this, take a careful look at Cocoon's code base and count how many exceptions are swallowed
or rethrown as unrelated kind of exceptions (with the ensuing mile-long stacktraces). It's
not that checked exceptions are bad in theory. It's that in practice very few developers deal
with them sensibly.
+
+''Vadim'': I'd much prefer to first deal sensibly with what we got, instead of making blanket
statements "checked exceptions are bad". As a counterexample, take a look at !TransformerImpl,
lines 3394 and 3418.
+
+ * [http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-xalan/java/src/org/apache/xalan/transformer/TransformerImpl.java?annotate=1.158]
 
 == Code ==
 

Mime
View raw message