commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig R. McClanahan" <>
Subject Re: [digester] pop(), peek() methods don't need to catch exceptions
Date Mon, 05 Apr 2004 02:15:07 GMT
Alex Karasulu wrote:

>I was just looking at the digester code as I was writing another incarnation
>of the digester pattern and noticed the pop() and peek() methods do not need
>to catch exceptions.  It is just cheaper to check the size of the stack
>before the pop() or peek() calls and return null instead of just making that
>call surrounded by a catch block.
>You guys want me to just make and commit these changes?  It's not really a
>big deal but thought I'd let you guys know about it.
+0.  No problems, but in the big scheme of things I suspect it won't 
make any substantive difference in performance.


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

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

View raw message