On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:17:36PM +0100, Sébastien Brisard wrote: > Hello, > > 2012/2/27 Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 07:28:30AM +0100, Sébastien Brisard wrote: > >> Hello, > >> while working on MATH-755, I've noticed that there is no error message > >> corresponding to a division by zero. So for the time being, when such > >> a situation occurs, I use "ZERO_NOT_ALLOWED", but I was considering > >> adding an entry DIVISION_BY_ZERO to LocalizedFormats. What do you > >> think? I could do this fairly quickly, in order not to interfere with > >> the current release process. > > > > There are several (overlapping) entries, a.o.: > > > > FRACTION("fraction"), /* keep */ > > DENOMINATOR("denominator"), /* keep */ > > ZERO_DENOMINATOR("denominator must be different from 0"), > > ZERO_DENOMINATOR_IN_FRACTION("zero denominator in fraction {0}/{1}"), > > ZERO_FRACTION_TO_DIVIDE_BY("the fraction to divide by must not be zero: > > {0}/{1}"), > > ZERO_NOT_ALLOWED("zero not allowed here"); > > IDENTICAL_ABSCISSAS_DIVISION_BY_ZERO("identical abscissas x[{0}] == > > x[{1}] == {2} cause division by zero"), > > > > My preference would be to rationalize, using the "ExceptionContext" to add > > more information where needed. E.g. something like: > > > > MathArithmeticException iae = new > > MathArithmeticException(LocalizedFormats.FRACTION); > > iae.getContext().addMessage(LocalizedFormats.DENOMINATOR); > > iae.getContext().addMessage(LocalizedFormats.ZERO_NOT_ALLOWED); > > > I like this use of the context. > > > > > But, if "DIVISION_BY_ZERO" is going to be used in several places, it might > > be good to add it. [Still, the redundant entries should at some point be > > removed (their use being replaced by a combination of the basic ones).] > > > I have to say that my preference would be to have DIVISION_BY_ZERO as > a "master" message, as it is pretty self-explanatory (and also > standard across different libraries/softwares). Additional messages > (like FRACTION, or DENOMINATOR) would be provided as context (if they > do turn out to be informative). This is my preference,
OK. > but in fact, > any option suits me fine, provided that we do rationalize. OK. OK. ;-) > As this is > not an API change, this can certainly wait. Shall I open a new ticket, > or keep MATH-755 open for this purpose? (MATH-755 is supposed to fix > 3.1 anyway). You can keep it open, or maybe you'll solve it too before the release... Regards, Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org