Now I thought we were discussing how to deal with checked and unchecked exceptions in Java (the language, not the platform). That much was clear to me at the beginning, at least! The solution for me is to be pragmatic and adopt the most appropriate approach (catch and handle, throw, wrap and throw... there are other choices too) for a given situation although I lean towards a particular style. We all have our own preferences, and as a freelancer I generally have to fit in with the coding style of the project, rather than warp the project development standards around my own preferences. I certainly don't expect to persuade anybody that approach X is better than approach Y. I'm interesting in using the one that is right for a given situation, that allows me to provide a solid piece of software that works (and fails) in a predictable fashion.
On that basis, moving language is not something I would ever envisage being discussed as a solution. Choice of language is the kind of decision that is made early in architectural development, where for example a case might be made for using a DSL or functional language to better express a part of the overall technical solution. With exception handling however we are talking about coding patterns which is more of a low level design/code decision. You want the same coding style applied by all your developers to deliver a uniformly styled code base that is then easier to maintain. So a suggestion to change language would not be viewed sensibly as a way of dealing with the checked/unchecked conundrum at that level. Repeating it puts you on weaker ground, not stronger - people start to question motives and objectivity. I don't think you are advancing the cause of other JVM languages by doing this... maybe a new thread around why to choose another JVM language instead of Java for a new project. To propose another language at an early enough stage of a project I'd expect to be asked to provide technical background to show why my proposal is worth considering, and also tie in business considerations such as cost, availability of skilled resources, maturity of the language... On Mar 28, 12:31 pm, Kevin Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > > You can move language, but still remain on the Java platform. That was kind > of my point... > -- 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.
