Hmm... Suppressed Exceptions are Throwables[]

[Joe Darcy]

Osvaldo Pinali Doederlein wrote:
>   My $0.02:  getSupressed().
>   

Hopefully the method name would not be misinterpreted as a command!

> - It's sufficiently clear (from both the context of the containing class 
> and the return static type), so this is terse without being obscure;
> - There is a BIG precedent: we already have getCause(), not 
> getCauseException() or getCauseThrowable().
>   

Good point; I'll consider this renaming.

Thanks,

-Joe

> A+
> Osvaldo
>
> On 30/09/2010 14:12, Mike Clark wrote:
>   
>> Re: "cause" instead of "suppressed"
>> To me it is fairly obvious that suppressed exceptions are not causes,
>> secondary or otherwise.  Thus I would vote against any use of the term
>> "cause" in relationship to suppressed exceptions.
>>
>> Re: "Exception" vs "Throwable":
>> The Java exception class hierarchy and naming has always been ever so
>> slightly awkward.  In conversation, when I talk about exceptions in a
>> _general_ sense, I mean anything that can be thrown.  Thus when I
>> speak of Java exceptions in the general sense, I am usually talking
>> about Throwable and its subclasses.
>>
>> This follows with the Java Language Specification where you will find
>> the specification of java.lang.Throwable under the prominent chapter
>> title "Exceptions."  So, you might say that while java.lang.Exception
>> is subordinate to java.lang.Throwable, java.lang.Throwable is itself
>> subordinate to the Java language feature "exceptions."  And so it
>> could be argued that the "Exceptions" term in
>> "getSuppressedExceptions" actually refers to the exceptions language
>> feature, not java.lang.Exception.
>>
>> I am also familiar with (and myself use, where appropriate) the
>> convention of keeping a method's name in sync with the type name of
>> its return value.  Under this convention, the method would be better
>> named "getSuppressedThrowables."
>>
>> However, I think the current naming ("getSuppressedExceptions") is
>> understandable and justifiable under the perspective of "exceptions
>> are a language feature" (e.g. JLS.)
>>
>> So for me, I'm happy either way.
>>
>> my 2 cents,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>     
>
>
>