On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:26 PM, [email protected] < [email protected]> wrote:
> And you hit this point "Here is what most people fundamentally don't > understand about checked exceptions: they are rare. Most of the > exceptions are not recoverable, so they should be unchecked. " > > They are rare? Well maybe they SHOULD be rare, but they aren't. > SQLException certainly comes to mind. 99% of the time you hit a > SQLException or IOException you can't do anything to solve the > problem. > That's exactly why I said that so few people understand checked exceptions. The developers who wrote these methods and decided that they should throw checked exceptions clearly didn't understand this, and they contributed greatly to giving this bad image to checked exceptions. You are pointing out a bad usage of checked exceptions, not invalidating the concept. I think we are in agreement that checked exceptions should be rare, but they should be *allowed* because in the few cases where they are useful, they are *really* useful. -- Cédric -- 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.
