oodt-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi>
Subject Re: Preserving the stack trace
Date Mon, 26 Oct 2015 23:50:07 GMT
Sorry should just clarify, reworking it into a different exception I have
no issue with, dropping the root cause is troublesome though.

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi>
wrote:

> First up apologies for anyone who had to merge my work from the weekend, I
> did it then in the hope it didn't effect anyone too much, on the bright
> side we did remove about 200 "days" of technical debt from Sonar, only 1200
> to go......
>
>
> Anyway!
>
> Here's one for you guys,
>
>
> https://analysis.apache.org/component_issues?id=org.apache.oodt%3Aoodt#resolved=false|severities=MAJOR|rules=pmd%3APreserveStackTrace
> <https://analysis.apache.org/component_issues?id=org.apache.oodt%3Aoodt#resolved=false%7Cseverities=MAJOR%7Crules=pmd%3APreserveStackTrace>
>
> Now I may not have been around in the Java world for as long as some
> people but we are catching exceptions all over the place and masking the
> true cause..... can anyone explain why?
>
> From my perspective its bad practice even without Sonar telling me, IBM
> also seems to agree:
> http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21386753
>
> We have enough issues debugging random errors as it is, munging the
> exception into another exception seems a bit crazy to me.
>
> Tom
>

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