On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 11:27:26PM +0000, Gary Gregory wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gilles Sadowski [mailto:gil...@harfang.homelinux.org] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 18:16 > > To: dev@commons.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [all][math] Help wanted with exceptions API design > > > > > > > > The currently defined exceptions in [math] can be found in the > > > > > > top-level package and .exceptions. Those in the top-level have at > > > > > > this point been deprecated. > > > > > > Don't package your exceptions in a package called ".exceptions". That is > > very odd. > > > > Why? > > > > > The exception should be defined where they are used. > > > > What do you do for exceptions that are used in several classes and several > > packages? > > Here is a probably too simple example: > > com.example defines IOException > com.example.input uses IOException > com.example.output uses IOException
Well, I don't see that as obviously better than storing all exceptions in an "exception" package. I find the latter tidier. The problems arises when one thinks that some exception is only needed in one package: com.example.foo uses and defines FooException Then one discovers com.example.bar also uses FooException Add a few more exceptions and soon people are searching the exceptions definitions all over the place, or create new ones that duplicate functionality that already exists in some other package. Regards, Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
