Andy Palmer - Latest Comments in Checked Exceptions are Waste

Re: Checked Exceptions are Waste

Kevin Wong — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 06:23:13 -0000

I always change my Eclipse default catch clause to:
throw new RuntimeException(e);

Don&#39t add and exception to the throws clause unless it will make sense to the caller. If it&#39s a case that should never happen, or cannot be handled, wrap it in a RuntimeException, which effectively converts the checked exception to an unchecked one.

I don&#39t see why an "ignores" clause couldn&#39t be added to Java methods to do this wrapping automatically.

Re: Checked Exceptions are Waste

Kevin Wong — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 01:23:13 -0000

I always change my Eclipse default catch clause to:
throw new RuntimeException(e);

Don't add and exception to the throws clause unless it will make sense to the caller. If it's a case that should never happen, or cannot be handled, wrap it in a RuntimeException, which effectively converts the checked exception to an unchecked one.

I don't see why an "ignores" clause couldn't be added to Java methods to do this wrapping automatically.

Re: Checked Exceptions are Waste

Steve Freeman — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 13:25:44 -0000

The reason Java checked exceptions are a pain is because, like everything in Java, they didn't quite finish when they adopted the idea. In Modula-3, there is a FATAL pragma which meant that you can declare that you don't know how to handle a checked exception within a given scope. If such an exception occurs then the program fails. It's so simple but it makes all the difference to the usability of checked exceptions.

The point of checked exceptions is that it allows me to know all the paths out of a chunk of code, otherwise I have to assume that any method call can fail and over-protect the logic.

Re: Checked Exceptions are Waste

Rugbyhead — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 13:27:00 -0000

Liking the ExceptionHandler object idea, could prove to be very versatile and flexible...
Next workshop?? :D