In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Aahz wrote: >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >> Paul Rubin <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>I was pretty skeptical of Java's checked exceptions when I first used >>>them but have been coming around about them. There's just been too >>>many times when I wrote something in Python that crashed because some >>>lower-level function raised an exception that the upper level hadn't >>>been expecting, after the program had been in use for a while. I'd >>>sure rather find out about that at compile time. >> >> That's funny -- Bruce Eckel talks about how he used to love checked >> exceptions but has come to regard them as the horror that they are. >> I've learned to just write "throws Exception" at the declaration of >> every method. > >Pretty sloppy, though, no? And surely the important thing is to have a >broad handler, not a broad specification of raisable exceptions?
Yes, it's sloppy, but I Don't Care. I'm trying to write usable code while learning a damnably under-documented Java library -- and I'm *not* a Java programmer in the first place, so I'm also fighting with the Java environment. Eventually I'll add in some better code. -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "19. A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing." --Alan Perlis -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
