ModSAX (SAX 1.1) Proposal

[David Megginson]

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 at megginson.com
           http://www.megginson.com/

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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)