On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 01:33:22AM +0000, Martin Berger wrote:
>    forall A B E: (A -> B throws E) -> list[A] -> list[B] throws E.
> 
> while i have not thought about this in detail, i dont think there's
> a type theorectic problem with this.

Yes, all well and good, but I *do not* want have to go and change all
.mli files to support checked exceptions, and then go and change them
all again when I decide to put a SQL database behind some persistence
library deep in the code.

This is the problem with checked exceptions in Java: the set of
exceptions that can be thrown is an implementation detail which is
exposed unnecessarily through the API.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones. http://www.annexia.org/ http://freshmeat.net/users/rwmj
Merjis Ltd. http://www.merjis.com/ - improving website return on investment
'There is a joke about American engineers and French engineers. The
American team brings a prototype to the French team. The French team's
response is: "Well, it works fine in practice; but how will it hold up
in theory?"'

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners