On Aug 22, 12:02 pm, Peter Becker <[email protected]> wrote: > But I agree with you that the alternatives aren't necessarily better.
Yep, everything has two sides (at least) :-( > Somehow error handling is never easy. Just take one of these nice > graphical displays of code execution (UML, workflows) and add the error > handling in. Particularly in workflows your nice and simple graph > suddenly turns into a mess. Well said, well said - very good example - and a reason why most people prefer assuming that everything is going well. ;-) > The same is true on the code level: code > that is pretty straightforward for the normal case can quickly turn into > a mess once error handling is added, no matter what system of error > handling you use. And either no matter what programming language. > One note: I think you could probably write a system where most common > technical errors are handled via return values, but you would need to > have a lot of unions/eithers. That approach is quite comparable to the > checked exceptions (I have done this comparison the other way around > before), but the control flow is quite different. In reality programmers could live without exceptions for many, many years. ;-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
