2011/3/26 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> > > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Kevin Wright > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> >> 2011/3/26 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> >> >>> >>> I don't think the comparison to OOME is justified, because >>> >>> - OOME can literally happen at any time. Really, any time. >>> - When OOME happens, there is very little left to do but crash. >>> - RemoteExceptions can only happen when you call a remote method. >>> - As I showed above, you can do something meaningful when a >>> RemoteException occurs. >>> >>> >>> >> Hey, why not just "let it crash" for everything? It certainly works for >> Erlang, where *everything* is a remote call to another process. It's been >> used very successfully in telecoms switches with over 2 million lines of >> code and nine-nines reliability; a few nanoseconds of downtime annually. >> > > The last router with Erlang in it was shipped in > 1998<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_(programming_language)>and "Shortly > thereafter, Erlang was banned within Ericsson Radio Systems for new > products". > > As for "Let it crash", Erlang helps very little with it since you are still > in charge of creating and maintaining the chain of supervisors (in other > words, no advantage on Erlang's part in this particular domain). > > Having said that, would it be to too much to ask you to create a brand new > thread when you respond to an email with a message that has absolutely > nothing to do with the message you're quoting? > > Because I believe that the philosophy of allowing exceptions to naturally bubble up through a chain of supervisors, as opposed to forcing your caller to explicitly handle or rethrow is directly relevant to the discussion at hand.
If nothing else, the Erlang approach shows us that different categorisations for FileNotFound, OutOfMemory, RemoteInvocation, etc. can also be seen as somewhat artificial when a different stance is taken regarding what exceptions are and how to handle them. Again, directly relevant to the issue of such distinctions being embedded within Java's exception class hierarchy. -- > Cédric > > > -- Kevin Wright gtalk / msn : [email protected] <[email protected]>mail: [email protected] vibe / skype: kev.lee.wright quora: http://www.quora.com/Kevin-Wright twitter: @thecoda "My point today is that, if we wish to count lines of code, we should not regard them as "lines produced" but as "lines spent": the current conventional wisdom is so foolish as to book that count on the wrong side of the ledger" ~ Dijkstra -- 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.
