Thanks, Sebastian, but I don't see how the discussion there relates to the "custom Java compiler" alternative postulated by Damjan, which is what I was responding to. Which is not to say it doesn't relate; I may be being thick.
Matt On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 8:50 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > There was some related discussion here: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IO-249 > > On 25 October 2013 12:52, Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Oct 25, 2013 6:30 AM, "Damjan Jovanovic" <damjan....@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Jörg Schaible > >> <joerg.schai...@scalaris.com> wrote: > >> > Hi Damjan, > >> > > >> > Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > >> > > >> > [snip] > >> > > >> > Thanks for explanation. > >> > > >> >> We would be able to adapt that for Java < 1.7 by swallowing the close > >> >> exception instead of calling addSuppressed() on the primary > exception, > >> >> but the show stopper is catching and rethrowing the primary exception > >> >> (Throwable), which javac < 1.7 refuses to compile because it doesn't > >> >> do "Rethrowing Exceptions with More Inclusive Type Checking" > >> >> ( > > > http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/catch-multiple.html > > ). > >> >> > >> >> But this would work and always sets succeeded correctly without > >> >> catch/re-throw: > >> >> > >> >> final InputStream is = factoryMethodThatCanThrow(); > >> >> boolean succeeded = false; > >> >> try { > >> >> try { > >> >> is.methodThatCanThrow(); > >> >> } finally { > >> >> } > >> >> succeeded = true; > >> >> } finally { > >> >> closeSafely(!succeeded, is); > >> >> } > >> > > >> > I guess the nested try was unintentionally ;-) > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Jörg > >> > >> Well that actually won't work, because the "succeeded = true;" will be > >> skipped if there is a "return;" in the inner try. > >> > >> Other than a custom Java compiler, I guess there's no clean way of > >> doing this in Java < 1.7. There's really only option 2 - with being > >> careful to always set succeeded correctly on all paths out of the try > >> block. Almost like releasing memory in C. > >> > > > > I haven't deeply followed this conversation, but would this be a > candidate > > for a [weaver] module? > > > > Matt > > > >> Damjan > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> >
