I SUSPECT that we are heading towards developing “recovery blocks”, which look
like:
---
ensure acceptance test
by primary alternate
else by alternate 2
.
.
else by alternate n
else error
---
I think these first appeared sometime around 1965 (they were part of a
specialist real-time language called CORAL, I believe…also a variant of Pascal
called “Pascal Plus”, if memory serves...).
Not sure that they were successful…I suspect that they required too much from
the run-time support infrastructure. Times change and they may be possible with
our MUCH faster hardware.
There are lots of learned academic papers discussing how this is A Good Idea…
BOB
On 28/09/2015 6:59 pm, "Dinko Srkoč" <dinko.sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 28 September 2015 at 10:22, Edinson E. Padrón Urdaneta
><edinson.padron.urdan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 3:22 AM, Maarten Boekhold <boekh...@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Just put the 'else' code at the end of the try block!
>>>
>>> Maarten
>>
>>
>> That's not a satisfactory answer for my question. Besides, what would happen
>> if the code that throws the exception is part of a return sentence? What if
>> the 'else code' that is after the code that throws the exception throws one
>> of its own and it's captured by the catch block(s)? In the other hand, isn't
>> more clear to have inside the try block only the code that should be 'tested
>> for an exceptional situation'?
>
>If I understand you correctly, what you're proposing would look a bit like
>this:
>
> try {
> mayThrow()
> } catch (e) {
> handleException(e)
> } else {
> try {
> shouldNotThrowButOneNeverKnows()
> } catch(e) {
> handleExceptionInElse(e)
> }
> } finally {
> cleanup()
> }
>
>I have two questions:
>
>* `else` as a keyword implies that the `else` block is executed
>instead of another code block. What would that another block be?
>* if `try` block is the last one in a method, it'll be evaluated as an
>expression and the result of the last expression inside try/catch is
>the method's return value. What would be the return value in your
>proposal?
>
>Cheers,
>Dinko
