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

Re: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: Have JDOM/ XOM /

• To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>
• Subject: Re: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: Have JDOM/ XOM / etc. failed?)
• From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 18:04:04 -0400
• Cc: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <C1C03AF3-3367-41BD-974B-D3409FB314E9@e...>
• References: <20060331181515.52963.qmail@w...> <26B5424A-181E-4A13-B9DB-4E63AD738AB0@e...> <442D7D27.8090204@m...> <39BC73F5-3EFF-4C4D-81E8-8EEE5344AF25@e...> <442D95EE.4050709@m...> <C1C03AF3-3367-41BD-974B-D3409FB314E9@e...>
• User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Macintosh/20051201)

Robin Berjon wrote:

> Sure, though you don't have the nasty interactions between checked 
> exceptions and method signatures. That's just scarily broken.

What are you referring to? I'm aware of no such interaction. You have to 
declare that a method may throw a checked exception. This allows clients 
to realize that the exception may be thrown for reasons beyond their 
control and then to prepare to handle it. What's the problem with that?


-- 
Elliotte Rusty Harold  elharo@m...
XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!
http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian3/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596007647/cafeaulaitA/ref=nosim

• Prev by Date: RE: Re: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: HaveJDOM / XOM / etc. failed?)
• Next by Date: Re: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: Have JDOM / XOM / etc. failed?)
• Previous by thread: RE: DOM's javascript roots (was Re: Have JDOM/ XOM / etc. failed?)
• Next by thread: RE: Re: Exploiting multi-core CPUs during XML parsing
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread