On 25/10/2009, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 4:02 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 25/10/2009, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 4:05 AM, Stephen Colebourne > >> <scolebou...@btopenworld.com> wrote: > >> > bay...@apache.org wrote: > >> >> > >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=826960&view=rev > >> >> Log: > >> >> Moved identityToString(StringBuffer, Object) to > >> >> identityToString(Appendable, Object) per LANG-542 > >> >> @@ -178,13 +178,17 @@ > >> >> * @param object the object to create a toString for > >> >> * @since 2.4 > >> >> */ > >> >> - public static void identityToString(StringBuffer buffer, Object > >> >> object) { > >> >> + public static void identityToString(Appendable buffer, Object > object) > >> >> { > >> >> if (object == null) { > >> >> throw new NullPointerException("Cannot get the toString > of a > >> >> null identity"); > >> >> } > >> >> - buffer.append(object.getClass().getName()) > >> >> - .append('@') > >> >> - > >> >> .append(Integer.toHexString(System.identityHashCode(object))); > >> >> + try { > >> >> + buffer.append(object.getClass().getName()) > >> >> + .append('@') > >> >> + > >> >> .append(Integer.toHexString(System.identityHashCode(object))); > >> >> + } catch(java.io.IOException ioe) { > >> >> + // can't happen - Appendable API forces it upon us > >> >> + } > >> >> } > >> > > >> > This change is invalid. > >> > > >> > IO classes such as Writer implement Appendable, and appending to those > can > >> > throw an IOException. > >> > >> > >> Yup. I remember telling myself it was fine because we passed a > >> StringBuilder in so the IOException wouldn't happen.... 'cept that's > >> only if someone calls identityToString(Object) :) > >> > >> I've rolled back the change for now. I don't like IOException being > >> added to the API. I'm tempted by the somewhat lame solution of a > >> private Appendable method, and explicitly supporting StringBuffer, > >> StringBuilder and StrBuilder. > >> > > > > Unfortunately StringBuilder & StringBuffer don't have a common > > accessible parent. > > [Seems like a design fault to me] > > > > Rather than swallowing the Exception, why not convert the IOException > > to an unchecked Exception? (and document the restriction) > > > > The only reason for using Appendable is to support > > StringBuilder/Buffer, so if it is used with any other Appendable > > classes, let the user beware. > > > Why not just do (StringBuilder, Object); (StringBuffer, Object) and > (StrBuilder, Object) if that's the intent? >
Either will do, but neither is ideal. However using Appendable + rethrown Exception allows code to be shared and so generates less code. It's also easier to maintain if there is a single copy of each method. Not so important for a short method, but some potential candidates are long. > Hen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
