Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #12696

Re: Quick Error Handling Question

Show all headers | View raw

On 3/4/2012 10:26 PM, Peter Duniho wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 21:42:29 -0500, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> [...]
>>>> Actually - we know that he has not foreseen all potential problems
>>>> and therefore does know what information he could end up needing.
>>>
>>> You can't possibly know that for sure.
>>
>> Oh - yes.
>
> Oh - no.
>
>> Nobody foresees all potential problems.
>
> There are plenty of examples of programs that are simple enough to foresee
> all potential problems for which emitting a stack trace would be relevant.

Not in serious programming.

>>>                                        You haven't even seen the OP's
>>> program, never mind know how complicated it is,
>>
>> Well - if you had read and understood the original post and
>> the thread that it is following up on, then you would know
>> that it was a general question not for a specific program.
>
> Yes,

So you admit that your question about whether I had "seen the OP's
program" was completely bogus?

 >   and as a general question and contrary to your stipulation, there is
 > no "one size fits all" answer.

Sure there is.

Log exceptions.

One may need it someday and it cost very little.

>> [...]
>>> But even if you could, you also don't know whether the stack trace remains
>>> available via some other mechanism.
>>
>> Let me copy paste what you chose not to quote:
>>
>> #It is far better to have all info in one place instead of having
>> #to try and correlate two sources of information.
>
> I chose not to quote it because I don't disagree with it and it wasn't
> relevant to the point I made in my original reply.  The OP makes clear that
> his concern is not whether "all info is in one place", but whether the
> stack trace would be available at all.

It is extremely relevant, because it is a reason to log exception
even if it gets outputted elsewhere.

>>> Otherwise, I suggest you brush up on your epistemology, as you seem to be
>>> having trouble actually knowing what is truly _knowable_.
>>>
>>> I don't disagree that logging stack traces is useful.  But to claim that we
>>> actually have enough information from the OP to answer the question with
>>> 100% infalliability is downright silly.
>>
>> I think what is silly is to recommend coding practices
>> based on an assumption that one can foresee all problems.
>
> What is silly is to recommend coding practices based on any assumption.
> Without the facts, you cannot know that a particular coding practice is
> important or not.

I think you should read up on the concept of "best practices".

> I know.  For you, even a basic "Hello World!" program needs unit tests,
> stack-trace logging, exception handling, source control, ad infinitum.
> Suffice to say, I don't agree.

Not very relevant here. The OP is asking about what he should do
when he logs and catches exception. Not whether he should log and
catch exceptions.

And besides I am not interested in hello world programs. And
it seems based on host questions that OP has also moved on
to real programs.

Arne

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Quick Error Handling Question Novice <novice@example..com> - 2012-03-05 01:10 +0000
  Re: Quick Error Handling Question Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-03-04 17:20 -0800
    Re: Quick Error Handling Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-04 20:29 -0500
      Re: Quick Error Handling Question Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-03-04 17:35 -0800
        Re: Quick Error Handling Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-04 20:58 -0500
          Re: Quick Error Handling Question Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-03-04 18:11 -0800
            Re: Quick Error Handling Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-04 21:42 -0500
              Re: Quick Error Handling Question Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-03-04 19:26 -0800
                Re: Quick Error Handling Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-04 22:44 -0500
                Re: Quick Error Handling Question Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-03-04 21:20 -0800
                Re: Quick Error Handling Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-09 21:26 -0500
  Re: Quick Error Handling Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-04 20:22 -0500
    Re: Quick Error Handling Question Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-03-05 02:48 -0800
  Re: Quick Error Handling Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-04 21:01 -0500
    Re: Quick Error Handling Question Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-03-05 22:59 +0000
      Re: Quick Error Handling Question Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-03-05 19:55 -0400
        Re: Quick Error Handling Question Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-03-06 00:01 +0000
  Re: Quick Error Handling Question markspace <-@.> - 2012-03-04 19:13 -0800
    Re: Quick Error Handling Question Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2012-03-10 15:21 +0200
  Re: Quick Error Handling Question Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-03-04 22:34 -0800
  Re: Quick Error Handling Question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-03-05 02:25 -0800
  Re: Quick Error Handling Question Novice <novice@example..com> - 2012-03-05 13:51 +0000

csiph-web