thrift-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Christopher Tubbs (Jira)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (THRIFT-5333) Exceptions defined in IDL to extend Exception rather than TException
Date Tue, 05 Jan 2021 20:23:00 GMT


Christopher Tubbs commented on THRIFT-5333:

[~Rtveliashvili] From what I can tell, you only get the "error: unreported exception TException;
must be caught or declared to be thrown" compiler error because you've tweaked the generated
code to remove "TException" from the throws clause of the method definition. That doesn't
appear to be a problem with the generated code, but is a problem with the fact that you've
tweaked it. The proposal by [~fishywang] to use multi-catch on the 3 first, and then catch
any remaining seems valid to me.

> Exceptions defined in IDL to extend Exception rather than TException
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: THRIFT-5333
>                 URL:
>             Project: Thrift
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Java - Compiler
>    Affects Versions: 0.13.0
>            Reporter: Denys Rtveliashvili
>            Priority: Major
> At the moment, if an exception is defined in IDL and Java code is generated for it, the
exception would be defined as extending TException like this:
> {code:java}
> public class MyException extends org.apache.thrift.TException implements ...
> {code}
> At the same time, definition of methods looks like this:
> {code:java}
> public int myMethod(int argument) throws MyException, org.apache.thrift.TException {
> ...
> }{code}
> Here, TException has to be included as that is the only way to signal that RPC call has
failed for whatever reason.
> Now the problem with this is that if one calls a method like that, it is obvious that
TException covers all those exceptions defined in IDL and so there is no way to clearly see
which exceptions are result of internal workings of Thrift and which ones correspond to situations
described in IDL:
> {code:java}
> try {
>   myMethod(123);
> } catch (TException e) {
>   log.error("Problem spotted", e);
> }{code}
> Why not make extensions extend java.lang.Exception instead?
> {code:java}
> public class MyException extends java.lang.Exception implements ...{code}
> This would have made it clear which exceptions are throwable by the call as "catch (TException
e)" would not catch them and explicit catching would be in order:
> {code:java}
> try {
>  myMethod(123);
> } catch (MyException e) {
>  log.error("MyException has been thrown");
> } catch (TException e) {
>  log.error("Problem spotted", e);
> }
> {code}

This message was sent by Atlassian Jira

View raw message