> From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Since we should keep the necessity of try/catch to a > minimum, I figure > > people can live with a RuntimeException potentially being > thrown until > > we can get true multicast functionality in. > > So the person calls the method, and because they are saving > themselves from the perils of exception handling, their > method fails. Not only that, but it silently fails all the > way up the stack until someone catches Throwable, or they > blow out the thread.
I think we have entered the "well it depends on your personal preferences" zone here. I see your point, and still I think my way is better - simply because I give more weight to my own arguments for no particular reason other than my own sense of aestethics. I have no problem debating the merits of our different approaches, BUT: > Why have a listener at all? To hold up the release for as long as possible while we debate things that are really unimportant compared to getting a release out the door. I don't think you're the only one who has had a lot of one-minute logfiles. So, how about we re-visit this later, if needed? /LS --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
