Not that wouldn't work. Each invocation of fooBar() will return a new instance of SomeException.

Why not just do try { doSomething(); } catch (SomeException e) { // handle } catch (Exception e) { // do something else }

On 04/27/2013 06:17 AM, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > I have a interface annotated with @MessageBundle which has a method: > > @Message(id = xxxx, value = "No param message") > SomeException fooBar(); > > > So the method expects no format params for the log message and returns a > "SomeException" type. Assuming some piece of code then uses this logging > method to do: > > throw fooBar(); > > is it fine to expect that if the caller does: > > try { > ... > doSomething(); > } catch (Exception e) { > // is this fine to do? > if (e.equals(fooBar()) { > // do some other thing > } > } > > I think the equals and even == would work for the no param logger > method, but is this considered as relying/guessing about the > implementation details or is this fine to do? > > -Jaikiran > _______________________________________________ > wildfly-dev mailing list > wildfly-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev

On 04/27/2013 10:10 PM, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > On Saturday 27 April 2013 09:11 PM, James R. Perkins wrote: >> Not that wouldn't work. Each invocation of fooBar() will return a new >> instance of SomeException. > Ok. I thought that for no param messages the return type would be cached > and reused. Exceptions capture a new stack trace for each instantiation, so they're not often equal even if their inputs all seem equal.