commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [fileupload] svn commit: r735370
Date Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:11:34 GMT
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
<jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akolkar@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
>> <jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akolkar@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>>>> +        } finally {
>>>>> +            if (!successful) {
>>>>> +                for (Iterator iterator = items.iterator(); iterator.hasNext();)
{
>>>>> +                    FileItem fileItem = (FileItem) iterator.next();
>>>>> +                    try {
>>>>> +                        fileItem.delete();
>>>>> +                    } catch (Throwable e) {
>>>>> +                        // ignore it
>>>>> +                    }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Catch the bits that makes sense to ignore here?
>>>
>>> Don't know, whether I understand your question right, Rahul.
>> <snip/>
>>
>> Similar to SCXML-103 [1] -- the above may be flagged for the same reason.
>
> I have read that bug and I disagree with the conclusion. I always
> would want to see the first exception and not prioritize them.

Ignoring the ignoring :) Is there any excuse for catching Throwable?
As opposed to RuntimeException.

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message