SAX: 1998-04-18 pre-release

[Peter Murray-Rust]

At 14:12 19/04/98 +0700, James Clark wrote:
>Making the read methods on ByteStream and CharacterStream throw
>SAXException seems wrong to me.  In a Java environment I need to be able
>to throw an IOException.  So they should be declared as throwing either
>Exception or IOException.  The approach in InputStreamAdapter of just
>passing through the message from IOExceptions is not acceptable.  An
>application may need to deal with different classes of IOExceptions
>differently, so it needs to be possible to propagate the IOException up
>to Parser.parse.

I agree with James. By passing the message alone you lose the information
such as where the exception originally occurred. I have struggled with this
a lot - if  a program reduces everything to Exception it can be difficult
to  document it but if all exceptions are passed up then it gets very messy.

[In JUMBO I use a JumboException - rather like SAXException, but use it to
*contain* other exceptions rather than lose their information. This is
probably an interim solution until the hierarchy gets sorted out.]

	P.


Peter Murray-Rust, Director Virtual School of Molecular Sciences, domestic
net connection
VSMS http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/vsms, Virtual Hyperglossary
http://www.venus.co.uk/vhg

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)