On Jun 11, 2011, at 2:26 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
> <head...@headius.com> wrote:
>> Ok, John Rose pointed out on MLVM list that a finally that does not
>> return would be the same as foldArguments, by flipping the order:
>>
>> int foo(Object arg1) {
>> ... return some int
>> }
>>
>> int postCall(int retVal, Object arg1) {
>> post(arg1);
>> return retVal;
>> }
>>
>> MethodHandle result = MethodHandles.foldArguments(postCall, foo);
>>
>> foo's return value then gets inserted into postCall's param list, and
>> you can either use it or not. Clever...I didn't think to reverse the
>> order of foldArguments.
> ...
>> MethodHandle result = MethodHandles.foldArguments(postCall, foo);
>> result = MethodHandles.catchException(result, Throwable.class,
>> postException);
>>
>> The postCall logic could raise an exception that postException is not
>> meant to handle. Am I wrong?
>
> I think I have it, and maybe I am wrong after all!
What!!! Last time I stick my neck out for you!!! ;-)
Kirk
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM
Languages" group.
To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
jvm-languages+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en.
