Yes, this clears up my concerns.
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 6:56 AM Brian Goetz wrote:
>
> It seems pretty hard to land anywhere other than where you've landed, for
> most of this. I have the same sort of question as Dan: do we really want to
> wrap exceptions thrown by other patterns? You say we wa
It seems pretty hard to land anywhere other than where you've landed,
for most of this. I have the same sort of question as Dan: do we
really want to wrap exceptions thrown by other patterns? You say we
want to discourage patterns from throwing at all, and that's a lovely
dream, but the behav
It seems pretty hard to land anywhere other than where you've landed, for
most of this. I have the same sort of question as Dan: do we really want to
wrap exceptions thrown by other patterns? You say we want to discourage
patterns from throwing at all, and that's a lovely dream, but the behavior
of
Here's some candidate spec text for MatchException:
Prototype spec for MatchException ( a preview API class ).
Thrown to indicate an unexpected failure in pattern matching.
MatchException may be thrown when an exhaustive pattern matching
language construct (such as a switch expression) encoun
- Original Message -
> From: "Dan Heidinga"
> To: "Brian Goetz"
> Cc: "amber-spec-experts"
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 8:43:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Remainder in pattern matching
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:38 PM B
Yes, and this is a special case of a more general thing -- that while
pattern declarations may have a lot in common with methods, they are not
"just methods with multiple return" (e.g., they have a different set of
characteristics at the declaration, they are intrinsically conditional,
they are
> From: "Brian Goetz"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "amber-spec-experts"
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 8:35:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Remainder in pattern matching
>> It seems that what you are saying is that you think an Excep
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:38 PM Brian Goetz wrote:
>
> Another way to think about this is:
>
> - If any of the code that the user actually wrote (the RHS of case clauses,
> or guards on case labels) throws, then the switch throws that
> - If any of the machinery of the switch dispatch throws, i
- Original Message -
> From: "Brian Goetz"
> To: "Dan Heidinga"
> Cc: "amber-spec-experts"
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 8:26:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Remainder in pattern matching
[...]
>
> One thing wrapp
Another way to think about this is:
- If any of the code that the user actually wrote (the RHS of case
clauses, or guards on case labels) throws, then the switch throws that
- If any of the machinery of the switch dispatch throws, it throws
MatchException.
On 3/30/2022 2:12 PM, Dan Heidinga
It seems that what you are saying is that you think an Exception is
better than an Error.
Not exactly; what I'm saying is that the attempt to separate stray nulls
from separate compilation issues here seems like a heroic effort for low
value, and I'd rather have one channel for "exhaustive
> From: "Brian Goetz"
> To: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "amber-spec-experts"
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 6:32:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Remainder in pattern matching
>> For when the static world and the dynamic world disagree,
It's a little like calling a method, but a little not like it too. For
example, when you match on a record pattern:
case Point(var x, var y): ...
what may happen is *either* you will invoke a user-written deconstructor
pattern, *or* we will test if you are a Point with `instanceof`, and
t
The rules regarding NPE, ICCE and MatchException look reasonable to me.
> As a separate but not-separate exception problem, we have to deal with at
> least two additional sources of exceptions:
>
> - A dtor / record acessor may throw an arbitrary exception in the course of
> evaluating whether
For when the static world and the dynamic world disagree, i think your
analysis has miss an important question, switching on an enum throw an
ICCE very late when we discover an unknown value, but in the case of a
sealed type,
Actually, I thought about that quite a bit before proposing this
> From: "Brian Goetz"
> To: "amber-spec-experts"
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 4:40:28 PM
> Subject: Remainder in pattern matching
> We should have wrapped this up a while ago, so I apologize for the late
> notice,
> but we really have to wrap u
We should have wrapped this up a while ago, so I apologize for the late
notice, but we really have to wrap up exceptions thrown from pattern
contexts (today, switch) when an exhaustive context encounters a
remainder. I think there's really one one sane choice, and the only
thing to discuss is
17 matches
Mail list logo
