Hi Rich,
I am very interested in your view of the world - why are 'checked'
exceptions evil?
Thanks
-Ralf
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 10, 10:52 pm, Stephen C. Gilardi squee...@mac.com wrote:
On Dec 10, 2008, at 4:38 AM, Ralf Bensmann
On Friday 12 December 2008 01:18, Ralf Bensmann wrote:
Hi Rich,
I am very interested in your view of the world - why are 'checked'
exceptions evil?
It's a huge and unending debate (last I checked). It's probably not
worth recapping it here. I'm sure there are reams of blogs and email
list
Just throwing Exception is discouraged in Java, because its the supertype
checked and unchecked exceptions. I often saw a JVM die of an unproper
exception handling -- mainly when NullPointerExceptions were involved. So we
are on the JVM, want Java interop and so my isistent recommendation is to
On Dec 10, 10:52 pm, Stephen C. Gilardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 10, 2008, at 4:38 AM, Ralf Bensmann wrote:
Being a Java trainer for a long time, we talk with students about
the handle-or-declare rule in Java and the two types of
exceptions: checked (declared) and unchecked
Being a Java trainer for a long time, we talk with students about the
handle-or-declare rule in Java and the two types of exceptions: checked
(declared) and unchecked (runtime). So I prefer using a RuntimeException
because no exception was specified.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 3:46 AM, Mark Volkmann
On Dec 10, 2008, at 4:38 AM, Ralf Bensmann wrote:
Being a Java trainer for a long time, we talk with students about
the handle-or-declare rule in Java and the two types of
exceptions: checked (declared) and unchecked (runtime). So I
prefer using a RuntimeException because no exception was
The throw-if function from clojure.contrib.except will throw a
specified exception type. If none is specified, it throws a
java.lang.Exception. I was expecting it would through a
java.lang.RuntimeException. Which seems more correct?
--
R. Mark Volkmann
Object Computing, Inc.
