Re: [Springframework-developer] DataBinder < BindException

[<jue...@we...>]

That's an early design decision that goes to back to Rod's original =
com.interface21 version of the framework. As far as I understand the =
rationale, BindException extends Exception because this allows to throw =
the binding status as exception if binding errors are to be considered =
fatal. The thrown exception can then be treated as Errors instance for =
convenient checking of the contained errors. This is of course a rarely =
used feature, as binding errors are normally not considered fatal.
=20
Unfortunately, this has the disadvantage of having not only =
BindException but also its subclasses in the "Exceptions" category of =
the generated javadoc. I'm not really happy about that, but the =
alternative of dropping the exception feature and thus not making =
BindException an Exception also involves the obvious need to rename that =
default implementation of the Errors interface. That in turn would mean =
changing the signatures of quite a few template methods in the command =
and form controllers, breaking current implementations.
=20
I'm not sure if such a change is worth the effort... What do others =
think?
=20
Juergen

________________________________

Von: spr...@li... im Auftrag =
von Rim, Mark
Gesendet: Do 13.11.2003 17:38
An: spr...@li...
Betreff: [[W3-SPAM]] - [Springframework-developer] DataBinder < =
BindException - Email found in subject



apologies if this question has been asked before (i can't figure out how =
to
search the archives).

i was curious why org.springframework.validation.DataBinder subclasses
org.springframework.validation.BindException  i just started using the
ServletRequestDataBinder and thought it was wierd that it was listed =
under
"Exception Summary" in the javadocs.