Uniform Handling of failure in switch -- Exhaustiveness on Exceptions?

[David Alayachew]

Hello,

Thank you for your response!

Yes, this makes a lot of sense, and I figured it would be the case. But the
article (surprisingly) didn't address that point at all. Likely because
just broaching the topic of exceptions in switch was a task on its own, and
this subject will come later.

I also appreciate the set theory formula at the end. You also posted that
in the other thread, and I still plan to respond to that once I get the
chance.

Thank you for your time and help!
David Alayachew

On Mon, Jan 1, 2024 at 2:27 AM Holo The Sage Wolf <holo3146 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Checked exceptions will remain totally checked.
>
> Given a function f, let checkF be the set of checked exceptions, then the
> expression:
>
> switch(root(args)) {
>     case branch0 -> do0(args);
>     case branch1 -> do1(args);
>     ...
>     case branch1 -> doN(args);
>     case throws fBranch0 -> handle0(args);
>     case throws fBranch0 -> handle1(args);
>     ...
>     case throws fBranch0 -> handleM(args);
> }
>
> Will have the following set of checked exceptions:
>
>    (checkRoot - {fBranch0, ... fBranchM}) + checkDo0 + ... + checkDoN +
> checkHandle0 + ... + checkHandleM
>
> Where minus is set difference and plus is union
>
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2024, 09:12 David Alayachew, <davidalayachew at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Amber Dev Team,
>>
>> I read Brian Goetz's "Case Effect on Switch" (looks like it recently got
>> renamed to "Uniform handling of failure in switch"), and I have a quick
>> question.
>>
>> I think it's cool to bring error handling into switch, but will we still
>> get the exhaustiveness/totality on checked exceptions that we are used to
>> on the try catch side?
>>
>> I feel like it would be weird and unintuitive if it didn't, since switch
>> expressions already give us exhaustiveness/totality, and that's basically
>> the biggest reason to use a switch expression in the first place. Leaving
>> it out for exceptions would just feel mean. Plus, having this feature would
>> really help with clarifying intent and with readability.
>>
>> Thank you for your time and help!
>> David Alayachew
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/amber-dev/attachments/20240101/efcd055c/attachment-0001.htm>