Jess, I think you misunderstand my closure proposal.
It *DOES* have exception transparency. That's in fact exactly what it
has.
You further claim that you can't add exception transparency to
Collections.sort() without making a change to the API. This isn't
true! Read my post again - in my proposal, Collections.sort can be
retrofitted with full migration and backwards compatibility to support
exception transparency.
On Aug 19, 3:58 am, Jess Holle <je...@ptc.com> wrote:
> Reinier Zwitserloot wrote:
> > BGGA's checked exception handling is extremely complex. I don't like
> > it at all.
>
> You can gripe about that, but it is the only thing that really makes a
> code block work "normally".
>
> If you have something like:
>
> for ( ... )
> {
> // some code that throw IOException
> }
>
> then you'd expect to have to catch IOException or declare "throws
> IOException".
>
> If you don't have exception transparency, then when you use closures to
> do something like
>
> forEachWombat( ... )
> {
> // do some stuff that throws IOException
> }
>
> You'd get totally different behavior -- which is *not* acceptable in my
> book.
>
> Exception transparency is complex in terms of implementation -- but
> rather simple in terms of usage. It's really a missing piece of Java
> generics and exception handling in Java as I see.
>
> As for Collections.sort() -- if you want this to allow throwing of
> checked exceptions from the Comparable then this is a dramatic change in
> the contract and, yes, Collections.sort() would have to be
> reimplemented. There's still a big different between "public T foo()"
> and "public T foo() throws E" -- the former is saying only serious
> unforeseen runtime exceptions could possibly occur in foo() -- that's
> the contract. That the Comparable contract and changing that is a big
> change. On the other hand, that's not to say that Callable wouldn't be
> a lot better as "public T call() throws E" than "public T call() throws
> Exception".
>
> --
> Jess Holle
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
