harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mikhail Fursov" <mike.fur...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Exception throwing compatibility
Date Thu, 11 May 2006 18:32:32 GMT
I agree that the easiest way for us is to throw RI or subclass.

Is it 'bad' practice to fix this "bug" (replace subclass with RI)  on user
request and do not think about this problem today?

On 5/11/06, Richard Liang <richard.liangyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> George Harley wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to start a little discussion around JIRA issue 436 [1]
> > which deals with exception throwing compatibility between Harmony and
> > the RI. I feel it is important to reach a concrete agreement on this
> > as so far all of the participants in the issue seem to disagree about
> > the interpretation of the compatibility guidelines on our web site [2].
> >
> > You can read the discussion for yourself on the JIRA page (it is only
> > a handful of comments) but if you are pressed for time the essentials
> > are this (IMHO - Nathan and Dmitry please feel free to fill in the
> > gaps) :
> >
> > * Currently the Harmony implementation of a few public methods in
> > StringBuffer and StringBuilder throw different runtime exceptions from
> > the RI under certain failure scenarios.
> >
> > * Where the Javadoc mentions the exception type that ought to be
> > thrown it mentions a type (j.l.IndexOutOfBoundsException) but the
> > Harmony and RI implementations differ in that they are throwing
> > different *sub-types* of j.l.IndexOutOfBoundsException. The RI tends
> > to throw j.l.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException while Harmony tends to
> > throw j.l.StringIndexOutOfBoundsException.
> >
> > * Dmitry (who raised the issue) believes that we should change the
> > Harmony code to throw the type named in the Javadoc/specification
> > (i.e. the supertype j.l.IndexOutOfBoundsException).
> >
> > * Nathan believes that the code already abides by the specification
> > and that there is no need for any change in this area.
> >
> > * Little old me thinks that there *is* a problem here but that the
> > solution is to do as the RI does and throw exceptions with the very
> > same runtime type as the RI. That's based on my interpretation of the
> > exception-throwing compatibility guidelines [2], in particular the
> > fragment "Harmony class library code should throw exceptions of the
> > same type as the RI".
> >
> >
> > If I recall correctly we did agree to discuss such compatibility
> > matters on a case-by-case basis. So, dear reader, what do you think is
> > the correct course of action in this case ?
> >
> > Best regards,
> > George
> >
> >
> > [1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-436
> > [2]
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/subcomponents/classlibrary/compat.html
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
> Hello,
>
> Let me support Mikhail "we should throw either what RI throws or a
> sub-class".
>
> --
> Richard Liang
> China Software Development Lab, IBM
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message