I'd humbly suggest that a sneakyThrow would be a very desirable addition to the public JDK API. Stephen
On 25 May 2013 12:35, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > On 24/05/2013 19:14, Martin Buchholz wrote: >> >> : >> >> Alan, you're telling everyone there's no need for Thread.stop, but you are >> replacing usages in tests with calls to Unsafe, which is not available to >> normal code. So you have a kind of moral obligation here to replace usages >> with "ordinary" java code. There are other ways to do sneakyThrow, and >> perhaps a sneakyRethrow method should be added to the jdk test library. > > For these the tests then it shouldn't really matter but if you or Doug would > prefer if they are changed to use sneakyThrow then we can do that. > > -Alan.
