Jon Ribbens <jon+use...@unequivocal.co.uk>:
> On 2016-03-15, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote:
>> Having to specify the possible exceptions in Java is very painful and
>> has complicated the introduction of closures to Java quite a bit.
>
> It is one of the extremely serious design errors in Java, I think.
>
>> I think it points to a big practical problem in the whole exception
>> paradigm.
>
> Well, no. That one individual language screwed up its implementation
> of exceptions does not mean the whole concept of exceptions is broken.
Python and Java make two.
>> Makes you wonder if the old error code mechanism would have
>> been better, after all. ("Why does Go not have exceptions?" <URL:
>> https://golang.org/doc/faq>.)
>
> I think they are wrong, and indeed their argument seems to be a
> ludicrous one based upon a misunderstanding of the English meaning of
> the word "exception"!
>
> Any high-level language that does not include exceptions is not fit
> for purpose, in my opinion.
I reserve my judgement for now. However, let it be said that exceptions
are supposed to make the code flow better. Instead, they are often
making code awkward-looking and "bouncy."
Marko
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
