commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <>
Subject Re: [lang] Nestable
Date Mon, 18 Nov 2002 21:07:43 GMT

On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Mike Bowler wrote:

>   > Sure looks to me like it could extend Throwable.
> I have always understood that all Throwables were either application
> level (subclasses of Exception) or system level (subclasses of Error).
>  It makes no sense IMO to subclass Throwable directly as you would be
> implying that you had a new category of problem that wasn't an
> application issue and wasn't a system issue.

It depends on coder preference. I have played with extending Throwable to
have a Notification class. I'm usually against turning off functionalities
just because the majority-experience doesn't use it.

For example, the StringUtils empty constructor argument. Most people make
their Utils classes private() by default, but a few people hitting found
it very useful to hit that from bean shell/velocity style tools.

> Application code should not be throwing or catching Errors so IMO
> Nestable should be a subclass of Exception.  Because you likely don't
> want it to be checked, it would more specifically be a subclass of
> RuntimeException.

I assume things like Oracle throw Errors in their driver or some such.
Unsure. Is Error just for JVM or do some low-level API creators also do

While a minority, they would still count as customers of commons lang in
my view.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message