Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Ugo Cei wrote:
I must say that I started this discussion with an open mind, but the more I think about it, the more I am convinced that Bruce Eckel is right: Java doesn't need checked exceptions, they are a failed experiment.

One could extend the concept and say the same about strong typing.

That's what Bruce does, more or less, here [1]:


"To claim that the strong, static type checking constraints in C++, Java, or C# will prevent you from writing broken programs is clearly an illusion (you know this from personal experience). In fact, what we need is

Strong testing, not strong typing. "

My opinion is that if you are given an exception that you don't know what to do with, that exception should not have been checked.

That's exactly my opinion too.


Ugo

[1] http://mindview.net/WebLog/log-0025



Reply via email to