On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Stephen
Colebourne wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
2) NullArgumentException
>>
>> How about putting in the backcompat?
>
> I would be fine with all four going in the backcompat.
Agreed. I've gone ahead and done that.
Hen
-
Henri Yandell wrote:
2) NullArgumentException
How about putting in the backcompat?
I would be fine with all four going in the backcompat.
Stephen
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional c
I think NullArgumentException should be deprecated and removed. It is
becoming a best practice to use NPE for null arguments. Joshua Bloch
has produced two books containing such advice, and Google Collections
has gone this way too. By the way, it's because the JDK has set this
precedent.
Paul
On
Hi Stephen :)
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Stephen
Colebourne wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>> 1) All the exceptions are in lang.* rather than lang.exception.*. Now
>> that the subpackage is pretty empty, it's tempting to move the
>> exceptions themselves down there. Given that it's going
Henri Yandell wrote:
1) All the exceptions are in lang.* rather than lang.exception.*. Now
that the subpackage is pretty empty, it's tempting to move the
exceptions themselves down there. Given that it's going to be a
different package (ie: lang3 not lang), this seems doable. Probably
best to onl
So some grumbles about the exceptions, and wondering which are worth fixing.
1) All the exceptions are in lang.* rather than lang.exception.*. Now
that the subpackage is pretty empty, it's tempting to move the
exceptions themselves down there. Given that it's going to be a
different package (ie: l
