CloseableStream exceptions [was: Re: experience trying out lambda-8-b74]

[Henry Jen]

On Feb 4, 2013, at 10:17 AM, Peter Levart <peter.levart at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On 02/04/2013 06:55 PM, Henry Jen wrote:
>> My preference is mainly build on top of that factory methods throws IOException. I still believe factory methods should throw IOException instead of wrap it up into UncheckedIOException so to enforce a try thus better reminds using try-with-resource to ensure close. So that is not going to change for those APIs in nio.
> 
> Why do you think throwing IOException would remind of using try-with-resource? The construct was designed for general AutoCloseable resources regardless of types of checked or unchecked exceptions thrown by creating, consuming or closing them…
> 

Because of forcing a try block with checked exception. Better chance than unchecked exception. Also this is not defined by CloseableStream, it's the implementation class to decide what exceptions are proper.

> 
>> The wrapping cost and suppress of exceptions(as in JDK 7[1]) is not really a big deal, it's great if we don't need them, but if we have to, we have to.
>> 
>> On change the definition of CloseableStream, which would be preferred?
>> 
>> CloseableStream<T> close();
>> 
> 
> you meant:
> 
> void close();
> 
> Could be, yes, but why not be more "documentary" and declaring it throwing the unchecked exception, like:
> 
> void close() throws UncheckedIOException;
> 

Because RuntimeException by convention won't be there, but in JavaDoc. In this case, we won't even mentioned in JavaDoc, the implementation class should decide if there are any RuntimeException it will need to throw and how.

Cheers,
Henry