Re: SecurityManager troubles

[Archie Cobbs]

Gary Benson wrote:
> > > +   catch (Throwable t)
> > > +     {
> > > +     }
> >
> > It might be more appropriate to only catch Exception, not Throwable.
>
> So I was halfway through thinking about this when I forgot and
> committed it :(
>
> Why Exception as opposed to Throwable?  My reasoning was that the code
> was added to possibly make more things work than do already, and that
> anything that might make less things work was to be avoided.
>
> The alternative to Throwable is to catch ClassNotFoundException, which
> is the only subclass of Exception that Class.forName throws.

It's definitely not a big deal, but e.g. you should at least not
catch ThreadDeath. Moreover, if there is some obscure, unrelated VM
startup issue, you might get an Error thrown at any time.. if you
discard that here, it might make the obscure issue even more obscure.
This comes from someone who's created his fair share of obscure
VM startup issues :-)

You're right that ClassNotFoundException would be more appropriate
still than Exception. Then the code is clearest about what exactly
is intended.

-Archie

__________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs      *        CTO, Awarix        *      http://www.awarix.com