Obviously, when sneakyThrows becomes part of the language, you remove the compile-time restriction that you can't catch checked exceptions that nothing in the try body throws. We're discussing an idea here, I didn't feel the need to submit an entire spec.
On Sep 23, 12:14 pm, Ricky Clarkson <[email protected]> wrote: > Reinier, > > Without rewrapping you would get into situations where: > > * you call foo() and foo() calls bar(). > * bar() throws IOException > * foo() doesn't, via some syntax like foo() spits IOException, foo() rethrow > IOException, etc. > > Now at your current point you decide that you know better than foo(), and > want to catch and handle the IOException. You can't, it's a compile time > error to catch a checked exception that the compiler believes cannot be > thrown. > > Rethrowing might be a better option, and does not need to add stack frames. > You can override Throwable.fillStackTrace to do nothing. > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > The majority of java programmers have standard rules that ALL blocks > > must be braced. > > > The *vast* majority of java programmers have standard rules that ANY > > non-trivial block must be braced, and will only keep unbraced the > > simplest of ifs (without elses), whiles, and fors. > > > That would mean a very very tiny fraction is even going to try and > > write try statement catch (exception(s) e) { ... }. > > > Is this going to lead to shorter code? After your try version, you'd > > have to do a check on whether se or oe isn't null, which is just as > > much complication in the end, except now you've introduced even more > > opportunity for the programmer to screw up their exception handling, > > and you've introduced 2 very different ways of accomplishing the same > > thing, always a bad idea if it can be avoided. > > > As I've been proposing with an official coin-dev submission for rather > > a long time now: The right way out of this dilemma is to offer > > programmers the option to explicitly state that they want to ignore an > > exception. This means it gets bubbled up as usual but they don't have > > to declare it as part of their "throws" signature. Something like > > Ricky's "throws private" but with different syntax and without > > rewrapping. Because java really doesn't need stack traces that grow > > even longer. > > > On Sep 23, 3:12 am, Josh McDonald <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hey guys, I'm not weighing in on checked v unchecked, just a syntax sugar > > > idea! > > > > We've got two ifs: > > > > if (foo) > > > bar(); > > > > and > > > > if (foo) { > > > bar(); > > > > } > > > > So why not introduce a cut-down syntax for common exceptions? Something > > like > > > this: > > > > try file=File.open(...) catch(SomeException se, OtherException oe); > > > > Which would be expanded out by the compiler to this: > > > > SomeException se = null; > > > OtherException oe = null; > > > > try { > > > file = File.open(...); > > > > } catch (SomeException e) { > > > se = e; > > > } catch (OtherException e) { > > > oe = e; > > > } > > > > And you can check the contents of the exception or not at your leisure. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > -- > > > "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee." > > > > Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald > > > - [email protected] > > > - http://twitter.com/sophistifunk > > > - http://flex.joshmcdonald.info/ > > > -- > > 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%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups > > .com> > > . > > 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.
