On Aug 20, 12:21 am, Peter Becker <[email protected]> wrote: > No implementation would be duplicated, the safe version could be a > subtype of the unsafe one. Not too many interfaces will face that > problem. To me it seems much better than not distinguishing.
Can you show me how this would work? I have a hard time seeing how you can do that without (oh, the irony), employing some sort of sneakythrow mechanism. I guess we will have to agree to disagree here, but I'm fairly sure the idealism lost in allowing sneakythrow is minor, whereas the amount of pain you can solve is sizable. (in practice, due to widespread bad API design we all know will never ever get fixed, such as in the core JDK) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
