Re: Varargs in Exception
On Apr 22, 10:20 pm, santax <shaoanq...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 23, 10:41 am, Daniel Pitts <googlegrou...@coloraura.com> wrote:
On Apr 22, 6:19 pm, santax <shaoanq...@gmail.com> wrote:> In my work,InternalEx is used inner of my module,kinds of ExtenalEx is
used for other module calling this module.
the inter class is External, which covert InternalEx to ExtenalEx
responed.
as shown below, the code for covert Exception is reusable.
my improve class is also here.but it's so uglily,how can i use
Varargs feature here??
[snip code]
Its not about varargs, its about applying the right pattern.
Instead of throwing an internal exception, and then converting it to
the external exception, why not just throw the exception you mean in
the first place? That would seem to be the most sensible, and I can't
think of any reason not to. Perhaps if you gave a use-case where that
wouldn't work, I could suggest how to do it in a way that isn't uglily
[sic].
Sorry,my present is not clearly.
"higher layers should catch lower-level exceptions and, in their
place, throw exceptions that are explainable in terms of the higher-
level abstraction" (Effective Java P134)
in my module, every layer has it's own Exceptions. When a higher
layer(External.class) call a lower layer(Internal.class),It catch the
lower-level exceptions and convert it to higher-level exceptions.
Right, but it shouldn't do so in a generic manor.
If it could be done in a generic manor, than it is a higher level
exception to begin with.
Its perfectly reasonable to do something like:
public void doFoo() throws FooException {
try {
canThrowIOException();
canThrowBobException();
} catch (IOException e) {
throw new FooException("IO exception while fooing", e);
} catch (BobException e) {
throw new FooException("Bob didn't like to foo!", e);
}
}
It doesn't make sense to have IOException know about FooException, so
why would your IntException classes know about (even by ExCode)
ExExceptions?