-
Bug
-
Resolution: Won't Fix
-
P5
-
None
-
5.0
-
sparc
-
solaris_8
In 5011108: review comments on previous XSLT bug, I suggested that
the try/catch be eliminated because it served no purpose other than make
things run slower. For unknown reasons, that advice was ignored.
Here it is agaon:
>Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 09:50:37 -0800 (PST)
>From: Rosanna Lee <###@###.###>
>Subject: Re: BugId 4987127 : (P2/S2) Has been Updated - by kincaid@east
>To: ###@###.###
>
>Arun,
>
> SecurityManager security = System.getSecurityManager();
> try{
> if (security != null){
> security.checkPackageAccess(className);
> }
> }catch(SecurityException e){
> throw e;
> }
>
>
>1. The try/catch block can be removed. The runtime exception is just
>rethrown so there is no need for the try/catch block, which makes
>things much slower.
>
###@###.### 11/2/04 21:48 GMT
the try/catch be eliminated because it served no purpose other than make
things run slower. For unknown reasons, that advice was ignored.
Here it is agaon:
>Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 09:50:37 -0800 (PST)
>From: Rosanna Lee <###@###.###>
>Subject: Re: BugId 4987127 : (P2/S2) Has been Updated - by kincaid@east
>To: ###@###.###
>
>Arun,
>
> SecurityManager security = System.getSecurityManager();
> try{
> if (security != null){
> security.checkPackageAccess(className);
> }
> }catch(SecurityException e){
> throw e;
> }
>
>
>1. The try/catch block can be removed. The runtime exception is just
>rethrown so there is no need for the try/catch block, which makes
>things much slower.
>
###@###.### 11/2/04 21:48 GMT