On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Jochen Wiedmann <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Rahul Akolkar <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Jochen Wiedmann >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Rahul Akolkar <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> + } finally { >>>>> + if (!successful) { >>>>> + for (Iterator iterator = items.iterator(); >>>>> iterator.hasNext();) { >>>>> + FileItem fileItem = (FileItem) iterator.next(); >>>>> + try { >>>>> + fileItem.delete(); >>>>> + } catch (Throwable e) { >>>>> + // ignore it >>>>> + } >>>> >>>> >>>> Catch the bits that makes sense to ignore here? >>> >>> Don't know, whether I understand your question right, Rahul. >> <snip/> >> >> Similar to SCXML-103 [1] -- the above may be flagged for the same reason. > > I have read that bug and I disagree with the conclusion. I always > would want to see the first exception and not prioritize them.
Ignoring the ignoring :) Is there any excuse for catching Throwable? As opposed to RuntimeException. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
