Details
-
Type:
Improvement
-
Status:
Resolved
-
Priority:
Major
-
Resolution: Won't Fix
-
Affects Version/s: 1.1
-
Fix Version/s: None
-
Component/s: PicoContainer (Java)
-
Labels:None
-
Environment:Nothing specific
-
Number of attachments :
Description
I used PicoContainer to mimic the Web Container calls. So my Start method would act like sevlet .init while stop would be servlet.close. I need some exceptions also to be thrown from these exceptions. So i actually modified the Startable.start to throw Exception and same would hold to Stoppable.stop.
Activity
Jörg Schaible
made changes -
| Field | Original Value | New Value |
|---|---|---|
| Fix Version/s | 1.3 [ 11331 ] | |
| Affects Version/s | 1.3 [ 11331 ] | |
| Assignee | Joerg Schaible [ joehni ] | |
| Affects Version/s | 1.1 [ 10307 ] |
Jörg Schaible
made changes -
| Resolution | Won't Fix [ 2 ] | |
| Status | Open [ 1 ] | Resolved [ 5 ] |
Hello Varadarajan,
no, we will not add any checked exception to the Lifecycle interfaces. It just does not make sense, since we cannot know, what type of exceptions might be thrown. Just adding "Exception" to expect anything is not helpful. See also Bruce Eckel's comment http://www.mindview.net/Etc/Discussions/CheckedExceptions.
In your case you might either wrap your exceptions with a RuntimeException or define your own Lifecycle interfaces using the LifecycleVisitor in 1.1 or the LifecylceManager in 1.2.
Regards,
Jörg