Joe,
Hi. Another nit: the wordings below seem to imply that "new Error()" and "new
RuntimeException()" (i.e. not subclasses) make checked exceptions, but of
course they are unchecked too.
Cheers,
-- Peter
On Jan 7, 2010, at 10:36 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
> David Holmes - Sun Microsystems wrote:
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> This looks fine to me.
>>
>> One minor consistency nit, sometimes you refer to "subclasses of" and
>> sometimes "subclass of" eg:
>>
>> + * <p>The class {...@code Exception} and any subclasses that are not also
>> + * subclasses of {...@link RuntimeException} are <em>checked
>> + * exceptions</em>.
>>
>> + * For the purposes of compile-time checking of exceptions, {...@code
>> + * Throwable} and any subclass of {...@code Throwable} that is not also a
>> + * subclass of either {...@link RuntimeException} or {...@link Error} are
>> + * regarded as checked exceptions.
>>
>> For consistency you could use the same wording for Exception as you do for
>> Throwable.
>
> Hi David.
>
> That difference you spotted was intentional in this case. The "subclasses"
> wording is closer to the wording in JLSv3 section 11, but I thought
> "subclass" was clearer to state the "RuntimeException or Error" constraint
>
> Thanks for the review,
>
> -Joe
