Interesting approach! I see the benefits, if you compare it to flowscript, where you mostly don't care about exception handling. And if you want to, you can explicit catch the RuntimeExceptions.
Javascript doesn't have any notion of "checked" exceptions, AFAIK. In fact, Java may be the only mainstream language that has them.
As it stands, our core classes and interfaces throw almost exclusively checked exceptions, but the vast majority of their clients invoke them via:
- the sitemap, which sends all errors to the <map:handle-errors> section, if present, or outputs a stacktrace, whether the exception is checked or not.
- XSP; as if XSP syntax wasn't ugly enough, you have to litter it with catch blocks where, almost every time, you do nothing but output an error message, which you could as well do via <map:handle-errors>
- flowscript (see above)
So, having "public" interfaces throw checked exceptions buys our users nothing but negative value.
Ugo
