Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | Bug in Unused Code > ... checked exception > Check overriding | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] JDT | Reporter: | Nobody - feel free to take it <nobody> |
| Component: | Core | Assignee: | Philipe Mulet <philippe_mulet> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | critical | ||
| Priority: | P3 | ||
| Version: | 3.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | 3.0 M8 | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Windows XP | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
|
Description
Nobody - feel free to take it
Works for me. If the check option is enabled, then overriding/implementing methods are checked as well, if not, they are ignored. I think, I got the option's sense wrong. But now, another option is missing to
me. I thought that the 'Check overriding' option would be what I am missing
now.
Please look at the following two classes ClassA and ClassB:
public class ClassA {
protected void foo() throws IOException {}
}
public class ClassB extends ClassA {
protected void foo() throws IOException {
throw new IOException();
}
}
foo() in ClassA needs to have the 'throws' clause because foo() in ClassB has
a 'throws' clause and ClassB extends ClassA.
Thus, the 'throws' clause in ClassA is NOT unnecessary and no warning or error
should be shown. There could be an option for this - the one I said I was
missing.
|