Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Message-ID: <45229019.1040609@elasticpath.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 09:30:17 -0700
From: Ryan Heinen <ryan.heinen@elasticpath.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Searching with "1"
References: <6456507.post@talk.nabble.com>
 <OF5D39A572.00DE2813-ON882571F1.007FC1F3-882571F1.007FECF4@il.ibm.com>
 <6456825.post@talk.nabble.com>
 <c68e39170609221659q23fb3726i70ee2806961400a8@mail.gmail.com>
 <6457067.post@talk.nabble.com>
 <OFB20F4D37.47E91AF0-ON882571F2.0003B203-882571F2.00045773@il.ibm.com>
 <6491379.post@talk.nabble.com>
 <OF850B4D3E.A75000E0-ON882571F4.00619EAD-882571F4.00630DF8@il.ibm.com>
 <6492358.post@talk.nabble.com>
 <OF4143A46F.1E06786C-ON882571F4.006667F1-882571F4.00672684@il.ibm.com>
 <6606447.post@talk.nabble.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0610021101040.14860@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu>
 <6611744.post@talk.nabble.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0610021713420.29091@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu>
 <6622407.post@talk.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <6622407.post@talk.nabble.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

djd0383 wrote:
> After thinking through what was happening in Hits, I decided to see if
> catching a general exception would come back with anything.  Although it can
> be argued that the code should have been doing this all along, that is a
> different story.
> 
> So, I added Exception to the catch clauses, and it in fact catch the
> TooManyClauses which allowed me to solve to problem.  My point though is
> that if the code was to throw this exception and require me to catch it,
> this problem would have fixed for me and potentially others as they are
> writting the code.  As an Eclipse user, it is nice when I create a try/catch
> that it puts in all the required catches from the code within the try.  If
> you were to physically throw this exception, my try would have built the
> catch when we created it, or at least errored that we needed it.  I was just
> curious why you were not throwing it?

My guess is that you are asking why TooManyClauses is not a checked 
exception. I'm not really sure why the decision was made to make it 
unchecked, but for a queries that will definitely not throw that 
exception it reduces the amount of clutter/extra code that needs to be 
written. There are, however, many debates about the merits of using 
checked vs unchecked exceptions.

Hopefully this comment clarifies the question at least.

Ryan

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