Re: exceptions: checked or unchecked?
- From: Lew <noone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 00:00:54 -0400
marlow.andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Well, that's the theory but all too often to the practise is:
the exceptions are typically mis-handled by doing a catch and
report stack trace and then ignoring them. I have seen quite a lot of
this.
Arne Vajhøj wrote:
Not really.
It is a common practice in unimportant throw away programs,
demos posted on usenet etc..
It is not a common practice in serious applications.
It's not uncommon in serious applications either. I've seen it done many times, and yes, it was in serious applications. In such cases it was bad practice, but it happened and much more often in more organizations than one would hope.
Sometimes the program is large with a history, and it's hard to know what is in all of it after years of development. A concomitant antipattern in these organizations was a strong resistance to refactoring. It's sad but true that bad practices are quite prevalent in serious Java applications.
--
Lew
.
- References:
- exceptions: checked or unchecked?
- From: marlow . andrew
- Re: exceptions: checked or unchecked?
- From: Joshua Cranmer
- Re: exceptions: checked or unchecked?
- From: Arne Vajhøj
- exceptions: checked or unchecked?
- Prev by Date: Re: regex problem
- Next by Date: Re: how to parse a xml document which has a combination of XML XQuery and XPath
- Previous by thread: Re: exceptions: checked or unchecked?
- Next by thread: Re: exceptions: checked or unchecked?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
