<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Hopeful Idea: The End of Checked Exceptions?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/</link>
	<description>Johannes Brodwall&#039;s Musings on Software Architecture and Programming</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:40:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bjørn Bjerkeli</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-7796</link>
		<dc:creator>Bjørn Bjerkeli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:43:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-7796</guid>
		<description>Hi have been arguing for a long time, and I think most of us (that actually program i java, not just read articles bout it) agree that checked exceptions ar bad. Pretty disappointing to see however how the poll acually goes in favor of keeping them.

It seems that one of the major problems that the java-community is facing, is that devlopers tend to argue in favor of something that seems to be good in theory but that doesn&#039;t necessarily work in practice. We need to keep this in mind, and we need write code and read code to actually understand this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi have been arguing for a long time, and I think most of us (that actually program i java, not just read articles bout it) agree that checked exceptions ar bad. Pretty disappointing to see however how the poll acually goes in favor of keeping them.</p>
<p>It seems that one of the major problems that the java-community is facing, is that devlopers tend to argue in favor of something that seems to be good in theory but that doesn&#8217;t necessarily work in practice. We need to keep this in mind, and we need write code and read code to actually understand this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bjørn Bjerkeli</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-84327</link>
		<dc:creator>Bjørn Bjerkeli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jun 2007 20:43:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-84327</guid>
		<description>Hi have been arguing for a long time, and I think most of us (that actually program i java, not just read articles bout it) agree that checked exceptions ar bad. Pretty disappointing to see however how the poll acually goes in favor of keeping them.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It seems that one of the major problems that the java-community is facing, is that devlopers tend to argue in favor of something that seems to be good in theory but that doesn&#039;t necessarily work in practice. We need to keep this in mind, and we need write code and read code to actually understand this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi have been arguing for a long time, and I think most of us (that actually program i java, not just read articles bout it) agree that checked exceptions ar bad. Pretty disappointing to see however how the poll acually goes in favor of keeping them.</p>
<p>It seems that one of the major problems that the java-community is facing, is that devlopers tend to argue in favor of something that seems to be good in theory but that doesn&#39;t necessarily work in practice. We need to keep this in mind, and we need write code and read code to actually understand this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tor Bådshaug</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-7571</link>
		<dc:creator>Tor Bådshaug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 08:42:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-7571</guid>
		<description>I couldn&#039;t agree more, I think checked exception promotes bad code, like the buggy or &quot;noisy&quot; catch blocks mentioned.
Also, to my experience, when repeatedly faced with the annoying &quot;catch or throw&quot;-complains from the compiler, most developers tend to find the quickest device to make those annoyances go away, such as an empty catch-block (ugh) or just use a throws declaration.

Speaking about throws declarations - you can choose whether to make them specific or general. Specific will tend to be implementation dependent, which is problematic for loosely coupled, interface-based architectures (as discussed here http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/stories/2003/04/01/JavasCheckedExceptionsWereAMistake.html). It also raises versioning and compability issues.

General throws declarations (like throws Exception) just defeats the concept. That&#039;s like implicit anyway if they were unchecked in the first place.

Most definitely a vote from me!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I couldn&#8217;t agree more, I think checked exception promotes bad code, like the buggy or &#8220;noisy&#8221; catch blocks mentioned.<br />
Also, to my experience, when repeatedly faced with the annoying &#8220;catch or throw&#8221;-complains from the compiler, most developers tend to find the quickest device to make those annoyances go away, such as an empty catch-block (ugh) or just use a throws declaration.</p>
<p>Speaking about throws declarations &#8211; you can choose whether to make them specific or general. Specific will tend to be implementation dependent, which is problematic for loosely coupled, interface-based architectures (as discussed here <a href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/stories/2003/04/01/JavasCheckedExceptionsWereAMistake.html" rel="nofollow">http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/stories/2003/04/01/JavasCheckedExceptionsWereAMistake.html</a>). It also raises versioning and compability issues.</p>
<p>General throws declarations (like throws Exception) just defeats the concept. That&#8217;s like implicit anyway if they were unchecked in the first place.</p>
<p>Most definitely a vote from me!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tor Bådshaug</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-84326</link>
		<dc:creator>Tor Bådshaug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 06:42:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-84326</guid>
		<description>I couldn&#039;t agree more, I think checked exception promotes bad code, like the buggy or &quot;noisy&quot; catch blocks mentioned.&lt;br&gt;Also, to my experience, when repeatedly faced with the annoying &quot;catch or throw&quot;-complains from the compiler, most developers tend to find the quickest device to make those annoyances go away, such as an empty catch-block (ugh) or just use a throws declaration.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Speaking about throws declarations - you can choose whether to make them specific or general. Specific will tend to be implementation dependent, which is problematic for loosely coupled, interface-based architectures (as discussed here &lt;a href=&quot;http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/stories/2003/04/01/JavasCheckedExceptionsWereAMistake.html&quot;&gt;http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/stories/2003/0...&lt;/a&gt;). It also raises versioning and compability issues.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;General throws declarations (like throws Exception) just defeats the concept. That&#039;s like implicit anyway if they were unchecked in the first place.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Most definitely a vote from me!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I couldn&#39;t agree more, I think checked exception promotes bad code, like the buggy or &#8220;noisy&#8221; catch blocks mentioned.<br />Also, to my experience, when repeatedly faced with the annoying &#8220;catch or throw&#8221;-complains from the compiler, most developers tend to find the quickest device to make those annoyances go away, such as an empty catch-block (ugh) or just use a throws declaration.</p>
<p>Speaking about throws declarations &#8211; you can choose whether to make them specific or general. Specific will tend to be implementation dependent, which is problematic for loosely coupled, interface-based architectures (as discussed here <a href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/stories/2003/04/01/JavasCheckedExceptionsWereAMistake.html">http://radio.weblogs.com/0122027/stories/2003/0&#8230;</a>). It also raises versioning and compability issues.</p>
<p>General throws declarations (like throws Exception) just defeats the concept. That&#39;s like implicit anyway if they were unchecked in the first place.</p>
<p>Most definitely a vote from me!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tomas Ekeli</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-7539</link>
		<dc:creator>Tomas Ekeli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-7539</guid>
		<description>Yes, indeed. You did give me an idea for a post :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, indeed. You did give me an idea for a post :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Johannes Brodwall</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-7531</link>
		<dc:creator>Johannes Brodwall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:06:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-7531</guid>
		<description>Hi, Tomas

Thanks for the comment and for the kind words. I take it that you have a different experience? I understand from your blog that you also program .NET Maybe you have a good story on what kind of problems you run into that would&#039;ve been avoided with checked exceptions?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Tomas</p>
<p>Thanks for the comment and for the kind words. I take it that you have a different experience? I understand from your blog that you also program .NET Maybe you have a good story on what kind of problems you run into that would&#8217;ve been avoided with checked exceptions?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tomas Ekeli</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-7530</link>
		<dc:creator>Tomas Ekeli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:59:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-7530</guid>
		<description>You make good points, in a shout-it-from-the-mountains kind of way. I don&#039;t agree with you, but you make good points.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You make good points, in a shout-it-from-the-mountains kind of way. I don&#8217;t agree with you, but you make good points.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tomas Ekeli</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-84325</link>
		<dc:creator>Tomas Ekeli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-84325</guid>
		<description>Yes, indeed. You did give me an idea for a post :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, indeed. You did give me an idea for a post :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Johannes Brodwall</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-84324</link>
		<dc:creator>Johannes Brodwall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:06:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-84324</guid>
		<description>Hi, Tomas&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks for the comment and for the kind words. I take it that you have a different experience? I understand from your blog that you also program .NET Maybe you have a good story on what kind of problems you run into that would&#039;ve been avoided with checked exceptions?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Tomas</p>
<p>Thanks for the comment and for the kind words. I take it that you have a different experience? I understand from your blog that you also program .NET Maybe you have a good story on what kind of problems you run into that would&#39;ve been avoided with checked exceptions?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tomas Ekeli</title>
		<link>http://johannesbrodwall.com/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/comment-page-1/#comment-84323</link>
		<dc:creator>Tomas Ekeli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:59:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brodwall.com/johannes/blog/2007/06/25/a-hopeful-idea-the-end-of-checked-exceptions/#comment-84323</guid>
		<description>You make good points, in a shout-it-from-the-mountains kind of way. I don&#039;t agree with you, but you make good points.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You make good points, in a shout-it-from-the-mountains kind of way. I don&#39;t agree with you, but you make good points.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

