The Industry choice
aahz at pythoncraft.com
Sun Jan 2 12:07:57 EST 2005
In article <xuTBd.66280$Jk5.42292 at lakeread01>,
Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
>> In article <7xacrs230c.fsf at ruckus.brouhaha.com>,
>> Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> 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 (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"19. A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming,
is not worth knowing." --Alan Perlis
More information about the Python-list