Richard Jones wrote:
>>>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.
>>
>>IMO it is part of the interface, just like the return type of the
>>functions.
> 
> I think in academia you can say these things. But on the sprawling
> real projects, badly managed, written by poorly skilled programmers,
> checked exceptions are a really bad idea. (Trust me on this one, I've
> worked on several such projects).

I design moderately large Java projects for a living, and I think 
checked exceptions are the only thing that forces poorly skilled and 
indifferent programmers to do any error handling at all.  When a 
designer establishes a sensible policy regarding exceptions, checked 
exceptions make it possible to be reasonably confident that (nearly) all 
error conditions are handled in a sane manner.  On a large project, this 
is a precious advantage.

There's nothing worse than using a library without having any idea what 
exceptions it might throw.  It's like playing Russian roulette.

Ben

-------------------
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