Re: How much data should flow back from a business exception?

Matthew Peters wrote:

> What do other people think?

Matthew, the way I handled this in SDO was to introduce a
"cause" 
property, with  a getCause() public accessor, plus an
additional 
optional parameter on the constructor for setting it.  You
can assign 
any object into the cause, though normally it would be the
originating 
exception.

Keeping this data separate from the other properties of the
exception 
gives you a choice over when it is output. In particular,
there's no 
reason for the getMessage() output to be the same as the
__toString() 
output. Whereas if you have logging turned on, I'd expect
all available 
data, including the cause, to be written to the log.

Using these two techniques may give you enough control to
preserve the 
information for when it's needed without displaying it when
it's 
inappropriate.

(BTW, I didn't myself make up this pattern, I just copied it
from 
Another Language Beginning with J.)

--
Caroline


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "phpsoa" group.
To post to this group, send email to phpsoagooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
phpsoa-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://
groups.google.co.uk/group/phpsoa?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

OK, several things got discussed here but picking out the
essential
attitude to the initial question:


Mike C says (I am quoting from pecl defect 10994):
" I would like to suppress everything with the
exception of the
exception description and number.  Exposing files and
backtraces in
exceptions to the end user I think is too much info to
expose (for
security reasons, and simplicity).  "

Graham says
"I think Mike is right that we shouldn't always flow
this information.
It is a potential security hole as it could divulge more
information
than we would like."

Simon says
"I wouldn't expect that a stack trace is required or
even useful."

That seems a pretty clear message that the default behaviour
at least
should be to suppress the details from the remote exception.
We can
debate another time on whether or how it should be revealed,
if anyone
ever wants it.

So, any volunteers to chop it out? We could stop generating
the "This
wsdl was generated..." comment at the bottom of the
wsdl since it was
only used for that.

Matthew


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "phpsoa" group.
To post to this group, send email to phpsoagooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
phpsoa-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://
groups.google.co.uk/group/phpsoa?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---