Inferring that what exceptions are thrown from a lambda
Stuart Marks
stuart.marks at oracle.com
Thu Sep 5 19:22:43 PDT 2013
Applying this to the OP's example, this would propagate "throws
Exception" out to the callers, forcing them to catch or to throw
Exception themselves. That's not what the OP wanted. Instead, the
example using a lambda that throws IOException should only be forced to
handle or declare IOException, and the example using a lambda that
doesn't throw any checked exceptions shouldn't have to deal with
exceptions at all.
With the new inference work in the compiler, the additional "X extends
Throwable" type argument seems to do the trick for some common cases. (I
tend to prefer type variable X -- "exception" -- over E, since E is
already used for enums and for collection element types.) It doesn't
work if the lambda throws multiple different checked exception types.
For example, the following doesn't work:
public void multiple() throws ExecutionException,
InterruptedException {
String result = tryRepeatedly(10, () -> {
if (/*condition*/)
throw new ExecutionException(null);
else
throw new InterruptedException();
});
}
Here, the compiler infers the least upper bound for the lambda's
exception type, which in this case is Exception, so that's what has to
be listed in the throws clause instead of listing multiple exception
types. Oh well.
s'marks
On 9/4/13 7:22 PM, Howard Lovatt wrote:
> It is generally easier to do this:
>
> public interface Action<T> {
> T run() throws Exception;
> }
>
> Which is what Callable does, infact the above is Callable apart from
> the name changes (Callable -> Action, call -> run).
>
>
> On 5 September 2013 06:11, Stuart Marks <stuart.marks at oracle.com
> <mailto:stuart.marks at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> On 8/31/13 11:04 AM, Esko Luontola wrote:
> > But if the lambda doesn't thrown anything, the compiler thinks
> that the
> > method may throw the most generic exception. The following code
> fails to
> > compile with "error: unreported exception Throwable; must be
> caught or
> > declared to be thrown"
> >
> > public void doesNotCompile() {
> > String result = Resilient.tryRepeatedly(10, () ->
> "result");
> > }
>
> A change to support this went in fairly recently. This now
> compiles for
> me using JDK 8 b105. It fails with the error you mention when using
> older builds, e.g., JDK 8 b88, which is one I happened to have lying
> around. (Note, I am referring to JDK 8 builds, not Lambda builds.)
>
> I believe that if a lambda throws no checked exceptions, and its
> functional interface method is declared "throws E", then E is now
> inferred to be RuntimeException.
>
> s'marks
>
>
>
>
> --
> -- Howard.
More information about the lambda-dev
mailing list