[Exception-Handling] What is optional. <-- Full stop, not question mark. RANT !
by Michael Uplawski from LinuxQuestions.org on (#5T8A9)
I have corrected one of my shell scripts and succeeded to get it running again.
This is okay.
But the time it took me to
Question (Rant): What part of Exception-handling do you consider optional?
I always like to recall the OutOfMemory errors in Apache-Tomcat, where the Error was caught and the handling was done by
Code:{}(full code extract).
Aren't there any laws against such laxity?
Personally - believe it or not - I consider it my responsibility to react as a developer! Else, why did I start to program anything in the first place? Control-structures (if) exist and while I am at it, why not use them?
Thanks for reading.
This is okay.
But the time it took me to
- understand that the reported errors weren't errors
- understand that the called program had no bug (other than the missing exception-handling)
- understand that the error was my own
- understand my error
- to correct the error
Question (Rant): What part of Exception-handling do you consider optional?
I always like to recall the OutOfMemory errors in Apache-Tomcat, where the Error was caught and the handling was done by
Code:{}(full code extract).
Aren't there any laws against such laxity?
Personally - believe it or not - I consider it my responsibility to react as a developer! Else, why did I start to program anything in the first place? Control-structures (if) exist and while I am at it, why not use them?
Thanks for reading.