badis
Unregistered
|
|
because when C# first came out people said it looks like Java but now it sounds like Java is trying to look like C#.
BTW, is there a plan to make the checked exceptions unckecked just like in .NET! Checked exceptions can cause a lot of bugs to go unnoticed with many developers catching them without doing anything inside the catch block.
I've been using Java since its inception and I have recently started working with .NET and I must admit MS had clearly done a neat job. Working with Java now just feels sort of going backward!
|
Udo Schuermann
Unregistered
|
|
Exceptions are there for a reason. Explicitly ignoring them with empty catch blocks at least requires that the programmer acknowledge that s/he is aware of them and allows a compiler to issue a complaint or warning. Completely turning off checked exceptions disables one of the most critical assurances of software reliability. That's a BAD-BAD thing!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
If you don't want the lazy developers to catch you exceptions because you think they'll just ignore them, then don't throw exceptions. Throw throwables instead. Nobody catches them. They always:
try {...} catch (Exception e) {}
that may catch Exception and RuntimeException, but not a class implementing Throwable without subclasses those two.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
