Re: NYIException

[Per Bothner]

David Holmes wrote:

> Seems to me that this is a RuntimeException then. Only an application
> that is being written for Classpath will be able to take alternative
> action if core functionality is missing. Any other application will
> just have to throw up its hands.

On the other hand, if the exception is UnsupportedOperationException
then it is possible for a portable application to try an alternative
approach - which may work.

If the exception is a new class, then that is not possible.

If it doesn't catch it, then nothing is lost.

> It should *NOT* be a subclass of an existing exception type that has
> well defined semantics and is likely to be caught in general
> applications - like UnsupportedOperationException. I agree with Jeroen
> that not being implemented when it should be, is quite distinct from
> not supporting an optional operation.

The latter is true, but the former does not follow.  I think creating
a new non-portable sub-class is solving a non-existent problem.

But more important is throwing *some* exception.  We *must* fix the
current situation where unimplemented methods silently do nothing
or return null.
--
        --Per Bothner
address@hidden   http://per.bothner.com/