检查异常！ [英] Checked Exceptions!
问题描述
我刚刚在microsoft.public.dotnet上阅读了一大堆线程。*关于
检查了异常（最长的运行似乎是< cJQQ9.4419
$ j*********@news02.tsnz.net>。
我个人认为.NET中需要检查异常.I
发现很多其他人和我一样拥有相同的观点。这非常令人沮丧，不得不用像抽象ADO.NET这样的黑客来解决这个问题
和CLRxLint（仍然没有解决问题）。
另一方面，似乎大多数@ microsoft.com海报都是
忽略或坚决拒绝接受参数（和事实）
异常规范与参数和返回类型一样重要
规范在创建时很好确定的接口。
我想知道MS是否有任何希望将MS检查
例外引入即将推出的它.NET的版本。在这样的问题上移动
MS需要采取什么行动（或者至少更认真考虑）？
这个？我意识到，在这一点上，在这样一个基础水平的转变
并不容易，但也许这将是值得期待的事情。
..NET 2 。
j ********* @ news02.tsnz.net> ;.
我个人认为.NET中需要检查异常。我发现很多其他人和我一样拥有相同的观点。使用抽象ADO.NET
和CLRxLint（仍然没有解决问题）等黑客来解决这个问题非常令人沮丧。
另一方面，似乎大多数@ microsoft.com海报都是
无视或坚决拒绝接受
异常规范与参数和返回类型一样重要
规范，当涉及到创建定义良好的接口时。
我是想知道MS是否有希望在即将到来的.NET迭代中引入已检查的
异常。在这样的问题上移动
MS需要采取什么行动（或者至少更认真考虑）？
这个？我意识到，在这一点上，在这样一个基础水平的转变
并不容易，但也许这将是值得期待的事情。
..NET 2 。
完全同意您对已检查例外的看法。我也用Java编程并且
非常欣赏这个概念
OvErboRed < OV ********* @ SPAMoverbored.net>在留言中写道
新闻：Xn ****************************** @ 207.46.248.1 6。 ..我刚刚在microsoft.public.dotnet上阅读了一大堆线程。*
关于已检查的异常（最长的运行似乎是< cJQQ9.4419
j ********* @ news02.tsnz.net>。
我个人认为应该要求检查例外情况.NET。
我发现很多其他人和我一样拥有相同的观点。使用像抽象ADO.NET和CLRxLint这样的黑客来解决这个问题是非常令人沮丧的。不能解决问题。
另一方面，似乎大多数@ microsoft.com海报都无视或坚决拒绝接受这个论点（和事实）当创建定义良好的接口时，异常规范与参数和返回类型规范一样重要。
我想知道是否有任何希望MS能够在即将到来的.NET迭代中引入已检查的异常。在这样的问题上，将MS移动（或至少更认真地考虑）需要做些什么？我意识到，在这一点上，在这样一个基础层面上的转变并不容易，但也许这将是在.NET 2中期待的事情。
I just read a whole bunch of threads on microsoft.public.dotnet.* regarding
checked exceptions (the longest-running of which seems to be <cJQQ9.4419
$j*********@news02.tsnz.net>.
My personal belief is that checked exceptions should be required in .NET. I
find that many others share the same views as I do. It is extremely
frustrating to have to work around this with hacks like Abstract ADO.NET
and CLRxLint (which still don''t solve the problem).
On the other hand, it seems that most of the @microsoft.com posters are
ignoring or adamantly refusing to accept the argument (and fact) that
exception specification is as essential as parameter and return type
specification when it comes to creating well-defined interfaces.
I''m wondering if there''s any hope at all for MS to introduce checked
exceptions into an upcoming iteration of .NET. What would it take to move
MS to action (or at least more serious consideration) on such issues as
this? I realize that at this point, a shift at such a fundamental level
will not be easy, but perhaps this will be something to look forward to in
..NET 2.
j*********@news02.tsnz.net>.
My personal belief is that checked exceptions should be required in .NET. I
find that many others share the same views as I do. It is extremely
frustrating to have to work around this with hacks like Abstract ADO.NET
and CLRxLint (which still don''t solve the problem).
On the other hand, it seems that most of the @microsoft.com posters are
ignoring or adamantly refusing to accept the argument (and fact) that
exception specification is as essential as parameter and return type
specification when it comes to creating well-defined interfaces.
I''m wondering if there''s any hope at all for MS to introduce checked
exceptions into an upcoming iteration of .NET. What would it take to move
MS to action (or at least more serious consideration) on such issues as
this? I realize that at this point, a shift at such a fundamental level
will not be easy, but perhaps this will be something to look forward to in
..NET 2.
Fully agree to your views on checked exceptions. I program in Java also and
really appreciate this notion
"OvErboRed" <ov*********@SPAMoverbored.net> wrote in message
news:Xn******************************@207.46.248.1 6...I just read a whole bunch of threads on microsoft.public.dotnet.* regarding checked exceptions (the longest-running of which seems to be <cJQQ9.4419
j*********@news02.tsnz.net>.
My personal belief is that checked exceptions should be required in .NET. I find that many others share the same views as I do. It is extremely
frustrating to have to work around this with hacks like Abstract ADO.NET
and CLRxLint (which still don''t solve the problem).
On the other hand, it seems that most of the @microsoft.com posters are
ignoring or adamantly refusing to accept the argument (and fact) that
exception specification is as essential as parameter and return type
specification when it comes to creating well-defined interfaces.
I''m wondering if there''s any hope at all for MS to introduce checked
exceptions into an upcoming iteration of .NET. What would it take to move
MS to action (or at least more serious consideration) on such issues as
this? I realize that at this point, a shift at such a fundamental level
will not be easy, but perhaps this will be something to look forward to in
.NET 2.
这篇关于检查异常！的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
