harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Liang <richard.lian...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Exception-throwing compatibility question
Date Tue, 04 Jul 2006 01:20:54 GMT
Hello George,

Agree. We shall always following RI when throwing exception. But Harmony 
"developer" could discuss specific problems on mailing list if he/she 
feels uncomfortable. ;-)

George Harley wrote:
> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>> For the example I've started this thread with it seems that complying
>> the spec is
>> more appropriate there. But probably there are other examples that
>> caused that the doc was worded the given way
>>
>> George and Tim could you please comment?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mikhail
>
> Hi Mikhail,
>
> I love this topic !
>
> FWIW, my gut feel is that we should minimise any disruption to user 
> applications that move from RI to Harmony. If the spec says Exception1 
> should result and the RI actually throws Exception2 then my preference 
> would be for the Harmony code to throw Exception2 (i.e. match the 
> runtime behaviour of the RI) and raise the matter in a Sun bug. There 
> is always the possibility that it is the method Javadoc that is 
> incorrect. If and when the matter gets addressed in the RI so that the 
> spec and the behaviour coincide, we make any necessary updates to our 
> code. That way we help clarify the spec and keep ourselves consistent 
> with what migrating users expect from their Java runtime.
>
> Sure, it is a problem if user application code critically depends on 
> the kind of exception thrown from an API call but I would sooner have 
> people using Harmony to run their apps with zero/minimal changes 
> required than see breakages because Harmony has taken the moral high 
> ground on a spec issue.
>
> OK, you can all start throwing rocks at me now :-)
>
> Best regards,
> George
>
>
>>
>>
>> 2006/6/30, Paulex Yang <paulex.yang@gmail.com>:
>>> Anton Avtamonov wrote:
>>> > On 6/30/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> But section "Exception-throwing compatibility" says that exceptions
>>> >> are different
>>> >> and we aim "to be fully compartible with the RI" "by matching the
>>> >> exception characteristics of each method".
>>> >
>>> > I believe that it is for "However, in most cases the specification
>>> > does not describe all possible exceptions that may be thrown" case
>>> > only.
>>> > In case the spec is complete and not looks like a bug I would vote to
>>> > follow the spec.
>>> +1 from me.
>>> >
>>> > Wishes,
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Paulex Yang
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>

-- 
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
View raw message