gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@trysybase.com>
Subject Re: [Checkstyle-devel] Re: CheckStyle on Gump (again)
Date Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:56:28 GMT
> I think you use too new API :)

w/ Gump it is always the latest from CVS, so errors w/ interface changes are
detected 'earlier' than the general developer/OSS world detects them. Gump
is giving us a heads up.

> In the latest SAX DefaulHandler.resolveEntity() throws IOException
> but in older one (e.g. which included in j2sdk1.4) it doesn't.
>
> You can either add this throws statement to method declaration or
> use older version of sax.  Unfortunately I don't see any way to fix
> this in general :(

Ok, so it seems like the XML interface has changed. Clearly this is an
unfortunate issue w/ SAX, but not something we (here) are in control of.

Since this change is not at the signature level (since throws statements
aren't in the signature, I believe) but at the runtime level, I would
suspect that checkstyle code could dynamically link against either
implementation without issue, it is just at compile time (and runtime in
cases of error) that a difference is noticed.

Could the checkstyle code attempt a try/catch for IOException around
resolveEntity & process that? I'm not sure if compilers will complain (or
just warn) if the called method doesn't throw IOException, but if it does
maybe adding if (false) throw new IOException('Bogus'); could handle that,
no? Do folks think this would work?

I know this is a pain for checkstyle, but I can't see another way for
checkstyle to span the two different interface styles. Are folks (from
checkstyle) willing to try this hack?

Thanks in advance.

regards,

Adam


Mime
View raw message