db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Van Couvering <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: "bug-check"
Date Mon, 15 Aug 2005 23:38:03 GMT
Thaks, Satheesh.  Moving the engine assert mechanism over would involve 
either more cutting and pasting or revisiting the "common jar file 
problem".  Personally, if we do any assert support in the client, I 
would like to just use JDK 1.4 assertions (and have it be a no-op for 
JDK 1.3 builds).

At any rate, to keep things contained, I am going to just continue using 
these error messages as written now, and we can address the issue around 
using asserts in the client as a separate JIRA item.

David

Satheesh Bandaram wrote:

>I think some of them were inserted during development to support some
>kind of assertions. We could change them now as appropriate. Should we
>consider using engine's ASSERT() mechanism in the client too?
>
>Satheesh
>
>David Van Couvering wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I meant "suffix" not "suffice"
>>
>>David Van Couvering wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi, all.  I am noticing that messages for exceptions thrown in
>>>org.apache.derby.jdbc.ClientBaseDataSource often have the suffice
>>>"bug check: ", for example "bug check: corresponding property field
>>>does not exist".
>>>
>>>Does anyone have any history on this and why this is there?  Is this
>>>correct, or should I be fixing something as I extract these messages
>>>into a properties file?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>David
>>>      
>>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

Mime
View raw message