True, that is one option, but then you are losing any specific exception information about the exception that was thrown.
You could solve this by using inner exceptions, but it bring you to a casting problem. If I create a DataLayerException with an inner exception to house all the specific exceptions I may throw in my layer, I would have to type the inner exception as the base type 'Exception' so that all possible exception could be passed as inner exception.
Then in my ui layer, I could extract the inner exception from the generic DataLayerException, but then I would have to cast the base Exception to the more specific exception.
I think this is a much less elegant solution, though it is possible and it does get around the recompile that would be required.
Hmmm... Handle yes, but most of the times, handle means just letting it bubble up.
For example, if I change something in my data layer that throws a new exception that I want bubbled up into the ui, why should I have to recompile the business layer that sits in between the data and ui layers?
>As for the standards mentioned (SOAP et.al): They're MS standards!! OK, maybe they can be open about their own standards but they sure can't accept and follow others.
Here is an entire suite of standards that (apparently) go againsts everything MS. Namely, cross platform interoperbility.
UDDI, WSDL, SOAP, etc.... All of these combined to form the concept of Web Services to promote the idea of cross-platform compatibility. And guess who was one of the three architects of the standards? Microsoft.
Slashdot needs to stop pointing at everything MS does as evil and bad. Also, stop using lame-ass old examples of their evil, ie Netscape & OS/2. The horse has been beaten and it's time to joint the rest of use in the year 2003 and look to the future.
Slashdot Mirror
True, that is one option, but then you are losing any specific exception information about the exception that was thrown. You could solve this by using inner exceptions, but it bring you to a casting problem. If I create a DataLayerException with an inner exception to house all the specific exceptions I may throw in my layer, I would have to type the inner exception as the base type 'Exception' so that all possible exception could be passed as inner exception. Then in my ui layer, I could extract the inner exception from the generic DataLayerException, but then I would have to cast the base Exception to the more specific exception. I think this is a much less elegant solution, though it is possible and it does get around the recompile that would be required.
Hmmm... Handle yes, but most of the times, handle means just letting it bubble up. For example, if I change something in my data layer that throws a new exception that I want bubbled up into the ui, why should I have to recompile the business layer that sits in between the data and ui layers?
>As for the standards mentioned (SOAP et.al): They're MS standards!! OK, maybe they can be open about their own standards but they sure can't accept and follow others.
9 /
.NET to Java to Python, I would hardly call any of those specs Microsoft owned.
Hey dumbass:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/CR-soap12-part1-2002121
http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl
http://www.uddi.org
With implementations in everything from
Here is an entire suite of standards that (apparently) go againsts everything MS. Namely, cross platform interoperbility.
UDDI, WSDL, SOAP, etc.... All of these combined to form the concept of Web Services to promote the idea of cross-platform compatibility. And guess who was one of the three architects of the standards? Microsoft.
Slashdot needs to stop pointing at everything MS does as evil and bad. Also, stop using lame-ass old examples of their evil, ie Netscape & OS/2. The horse has been beaten and it's time to joint the rest of use in the year 2003 and look to the future.