I consider it sufficient (preferable) to do the following:
@param foo the foo, not null
Where the ", not null" implies NPE when a null is passed in (document
once in the overview javadoc if you feel necessary). This approach is
easier to transfer to a @NotNull annotation in the future (or the
proper language solution of nullable types!)
Stephen
On 2 March 2011 16:50, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote:
> I neglected to mention that Commons Math *should* document what exceptions
> are to be expected. If a method is designed to throw NPE because of a null
> argument (whether through explicit checking or not), @throws should mention
> that.
>
> Paul
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Adrian Crum <
> adrian.c...@sandglass-software.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree with this view. It would help the developer who uses CM if the
>> library told him/her what they did wrong ("argument 'foo' cannot be null")
>> instead of a simple exception thrown message ("NullPointerException thrown
>> at line nnn of class Xyz").
>>
>> -Adrian
>>
>>
>> On 3/2/2011 3:37 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>
>>> In my view, the
>>> exceptions are good if they allow to easily track down bugs (be they in CM
>>> or in user code). Accordingly they must precisely point to the source of
>>> the
>>> problem (in the code) and not try to outguess the user (as to what it
>>> should mean for him).
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
