[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: ModSAX (SAX 1.1) Proposal

• From: David Megginson <david@m...>
• To: "'xml-dev@i...'" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:11:49 -0500 (EST)

Jarle Stabell writes:

 > Is it obvious that one should throw exceptions on not supported?  I
 > believe it in many cases would be more comfortable if it returned a
 > boolean supported or not instead of throwing an exception, as many
 > clients probably want/need to check whether a particular feature is
 > supported or not (and trade off behaviour accordingly)

As I just mentioned in a reply to Don, exceptions provide for cleaner
code and they help avoid bugs by enabling more compile-time checking.
It's easy to write

  parser.setFeature("org.xml.sax.features.namespaces", true);

and forget to check the return value, but it's harder to forget to
catch an exception.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david@m...
           http://www.megginson.com/

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ModSAX (SAX 1.1) Proposal
    • From: Tyler Baker <tyler@i...>

• References:
  • RE: ModSAX (SAX 1.1) Proposal
    • From: Jarle Stabell <jarle.stabell@d...>

• Prev by Date: XML 1.0 Errata, one year later
• Next by Date: Re: ModSAX (SAX 1.1) Proposal
• Previous by thread: RE: ModSAX (SAX 1.1) Proposal
• Next by thread: Re: ModSAX (SAX 1.1) Proposal
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread