Spec#, nullables and more

Bruno Medeiros brunodomedeiros+spam at com.gmail
Thu Nov 25 09:00:45 PST 2010


On 05/11/2010 18:52, Walter Bright wrote:
>
> I think you misunderstand why checked exceptions are such a bad idea.
> It's not just that they are inconvenient and annoying. They decrease
> security by *hiding* bugs. That is the opposite of what you'd want in a
> high security language.
>
> http://www.mindview.net/Etc/Discussions/CheckedExceptions
>
>

Just to clarify: Checked Exceptions are not a source of bugs per se. 
What is a source of bugs is catch-hiding an exception temporarily and 
then forgetting to change the code later (that's the case Bruce mentions 
in the article).
But with discipline you can avoid this: just don't catch-hide 
exceptions. One never catch-hides exceptions by mistake, it is always 
conscious (unlike other bugs like off-by-ones, logic errors, etc.).
For example in Java I *always* wrap exceptions I don't care about in a 
RuntimeException, (using the adapter Bruce presented in that article, 
actually).
Is it annoying and/or unnecessary? Well, I'm not making a statement 
about that, just that it will only actually cause bugs if you are lazy.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list