What I pile on non sense. Checked Exceptions are indeed a massive failure. IOException, SQLException all just a huge abortion bloating up code that all frameworks simply wrap for no real ultimate reward to the caller.
On your point about Spring having equal detractors, yes I guess if you count all the sad lemmings still bounding around the argument how the next J2EE is going to save the world, then yes it probably does. Though on the Exception usage they made a very pragmatic decision to go with one idiom rather than a broken two idiom approach and therefore you know what to expect from the stack. 2010/9/22 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> > Yup, interesting post. > > I agree with Stephen on most points except the checked exceptions part (I > posted this as a comment on his blog but JRoller sucks rocks so my comment > disappeared. Why is anyone still using this prehistoric software?). > > Calling checked exceptions a "failed experiment" is a bit naive, and using > Spring as an illustration of this is pretty ironic. If anything, Spring > showed that using 100% runtime exceptions is as bad as using 0%. > > I use Spring on a daily basis and I spend an enormous amount of time going > through pages and pages of logs containing endless stack traces of runtime > exceptions, all more useless than the next. I contend that if it was > possible to use checked exceptions judiciously, most of these errors could > have been caught at compile time. > > Besides, in my experience, Spring has as many haters as supporters, so it's > not really a shiny endorsement for runtime exceptions. > > It's clear that checked exceptions are hard to get right, but I am > convinced that they are vital to produce robust software and that the > correct approach is a mix of runtime and checked exceptions. > > -- > Cédric > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:52 PM, [email protected] < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Interesting: >> http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/the_next_big_jvm_language1 >> >> He makes some good points, although I would also advocate >> >> 1) building more literals into The Next Big JVM Language such as >> literal collections [], regular expressions /REGEXGOES HERE/, etc >> (basically what groovy/ruby have) >> 2) optional dynamic typing >> >> -- >> 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]<javaposse%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >> >> > > > -- > 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]<javaposse%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- 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.
