Hello ,
I don't understand why option one is not correct here , we know that EJBTransactionRolledbackException is EJBException -which is RuntimeException-
So option one is valid in this situation.
Please explain.
About Question enthuware.oce-jpad.v6.2.393 :
Moderators: Site Manager, fjwalraven
-
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 2:44 am
- Contact:
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10065
- Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:26 pm
- Contact:
Re: About Question enthuware.oce-jpad.v6.2.393 :
The options are looking for the exact exception class instead of common super classes. We will update the problem statement to make it clear.
Hth,
Paul
Hth,
Paul
If you like our products and services, please help us by posting your review here.
-
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: About Question enthuware.oce-jpad.v6.2.393 :
The specification is not in "EJB 3.0 core specification", but in "JSR 318: Enterprise JavaBeansTM,Version 3.1EJB Core Contracts and Requirements" .
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10065
- Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:26 pm
- Contact:
Re: About Question enthuware.oce-jpad.v6.2.393 :
And how would you write "JSR 318: Enterprise JavaBeansTM,Version 3.1EJB Core Contracts and Requirements" in short?
If you like our products and services, please help us by posting your review here.
-
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2015 4:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: About Question enthuware.oce-jpad.v6.2.393 :
I would not name it 3.0, just because it is 3.1 . Fill the difference.admin wrote:And how would you write "JSR 318: Enterprise JavaBeansTM,Version 3.1EJB Core Contracts and Requirements" in short?
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10065
- Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:26 pm
- Contact:
Re: About Question enthuware.oce-jpad.v6.2.393 :
You are right. Done.
thank you for your feedback!
thank you for your feedback!
If you like our products and services, please help us by posting your review here.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 67 guests