Because explicit naming of possibly thrown exceptions - leads also to unmaintainable code.
Do you really know what exceptions your component MIGHT throw in the next version? I kknow some java projects where suddently all exceptions were inherited from RuntimeException, which did not require this explicit mentioning. So - the resolution is not to be lazy and read the documentation saying which exceptions might be thrown, PLUS - putting in and handling "unexpected exceptions". Regards Thomas Tomiczek THONA Consulting Ltd. (Microsoft MVP C#/.NET) -----Original Message----- From: Miguel Ángel Chacón [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Mittwoch, 24. April 2002 13:19 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [DOTNET] Exception architecture of .NET Hi, taking in account that .Net exceptions are very similar to java exceptions, where is the 'throws', that makes a developer to 'mark' his functions that throws a particular type of exception. This is very useful in Java, because the compiler don´t compile if don´t write code to catch all the possible exceptions a function can throw. Why this is not in the .NET Framework? You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET, or subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com. You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET, or subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
