2011/3/28 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Casper Bang <[email protected]>wrote: > >> > By the way, here is something that happens fairly frequently around me >> (it >> > just occurred to me that this was relevant to our current discussion). >> >> I kind of see where you are going, and yet, I will claim that Spring >> is yet another complex solution in search of a problem, so that >> doesn't really get us much further. :) >> > > I disagree. > > First of all, I think that Spring solved some very clearly identified > problems with Jave EE, which is why it became so successful. It was > certainly not a solution in search of a problem. > > However, this was then, and this is now. By solving these problems, Spring > introduced quite a few new problems and flawed processes of its own, and we > are paying the price now (100% runtime exceptions is one, but another > erosion of Java's static safety was the overall reliance on XML. It also > grew to be as complex as J2EE). > > Second, as I already mentioned, my anecdote is less about Spring than about > a very real problem with runtime exceptions that I'd like to see addressed. > I'm not married to checked exceptions, but as of today, they are the best > technique we have to solve the problem that I described in this anecdote. > > This is the problem causing Java's excessive stack traces, just exemplified by Spring more than most other libraries/frameworks: http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-nouns.html
The "best technique" to solve this arguably isn't checked exceptions. It's true alternate return values coupled with a decent implementation of closures to pull much of the boilerplate out of those stack traces. -- > 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. > -- 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.
