commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From robert burrell donkin <>
Subject Re: [digester] pop(), peek() methods don't need to catch exceptions
Date Sun, 04 Apr 2004 20:23:43 GMT

On 4 Apr 2004, at 20:14, Alex Karasulu wrote:

> Hi,
> 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.

sounds reasonable to me. anyone else see any reason not to make these 

- robert

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

View raw message