Why don't we just change checked exception from being an error to
being a warning? It would not break any kind of compatibility. And as
a library author, you still get the power to tell your clients that
here's something to pay special attention to, but without getting in
the way of people doing fast and ad-hoc prototyping/refactoring/
debugging.
If this was the default behavior of checked exceptions, I would
probably be for them. One could even introduce SuppressWarnings
("checked") as a cleaner version of Lombok's @SneakyThrows. I have a
javac where this has been done (along with converting
UnreachableStatement to a warning and allow checked exception catch
without a throw) and it appears to work nicely.
/Casper
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
