Re: [xml-dev] SAXException, checked, buy why?

[Alan Gutierrez <alan-xml-dev@engrm.com>]

* Karl Waclawek <karl@waclawek.net> [2005-01-04 15:22]:
> Alan Gutierrez wrote:
> 
> >>>  I think the API sticks it's nose in. I think API provides a
> >>>  conduit for XML message events coming in, and it needs to
> >>>  provide a conduit for error events going, er, where ever.
> >>
> >>Yes, a conduit, but it should not care about what goes through
> >>that conduit.  This would create unnecessary dependencies.
> >
> >
> >    No. I think that means a lot of Object.
> >    
> >    Attaching a map to the error event?
> 
> The fact that you are adding certain methods with a specific signature
> already defines dependencies, even if you use Object everywhere.
> Using an abstract class is more open, IMO. It would serve as what
> you would call an opaque pointer in other languages.

    I don't follow.

    public interface StrategyError /* maybe something here */ {
        // Stuff here.
    }

    Suggestions?

    My thought.

    public final StrategyError extends Error {
        private final HashMap variables = new HashMap();

        public StrategyError(Throwable cause) {
            super(cause);
        }

        public Map variables() {
            return variables;
        }
    }

    Very flexible.

--
Alan Gutierrez - alan@engrm.com