On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 11:40:00 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:30:36 UTC, wjoe wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:01:33 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
>> Could you please elaborate why checked exceptions are more annoying?
>>
>
> For me, it's because they require all functions that touch them to either try/catch or include an exception specification in its declaration. In my Java days, I ended up just doing what so many others do and adding `throws Exception` or `catch(Exception)` to avoid having to handle multiple exception types. Most of the time, I didn't care what specific sort of exception was thrown.

Johannes, Dennis, Mike that was very insightful. I didn't consider those reasons.
Thank you very much for the elaboration :)

On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 11:40:00 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:30:36 UTC, wjoe wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:01:33 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
>> Could you please elaborate why checked exceptions are more annoying?
>>
>
> For me, it's because they require all functions that touch them to either try/catch or include an exception specification in its declaration. In my Java days, I ended up just doing what so many others do and adding `throws Exception` or `catch(Exception)` to avoid having to handle multiple exception types. Most of the time, I didn't care what specific sort of exception was thrown.

Because of the problems with checked exceptions they were deliberately left out in C#. Here is an interview with Anders Hejlsberg, the creator of C# at MS, where he explains the reasons for this decision: https://www.artima.com/intv/handcuffs.html

On Tuesday, 2 June 2020 at 13:58:13 UTC, Bienlein wrote:
> Because of the problems with checked exceptions they were deliberately left out in C#. Here is an interview with Anders Hejlsberg, the creator of C# at MS, where he explains the reasons for this decision: https://www.artima.com/intv/handcuffs.html

This wouldn't seem to apply if checked exceptions were inferred by default, right? And the issues with Java generics don't apply to D, because our metaprogramming infers attributes anyways.

On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:30:36 UTC, wjoe wrote:
>
> Could you please elaborate why checked exceptions are more annoying?
>


Have like 3 functions : A calls B, B calls C .

Imagine that now you need to throw a checked exception on C, that before wasn't necessary.
You need to add the annoying "throws X" to A and B. And A and B could be on another module or on a different project. Perhaps, the guy that wrote B, was previsor, and putted "throws Exception" (or another generic Exception derived class) on B to avoid problems, but now you have loss the information about the specific Exception that C throws. So again, the compiler can't know what kind of exception could be throwed by A beyond of a generic "Exception" (or another generic exception class). Another workaround, could be wrapping the C throwed exception by a generic exception on B.

I work daily with Java, and it's pretty annoying. That the IDE helps you auto putting the throws or suggesting a try/catch, helps. But we ended making some generic exceptions RuntimeExceptions to avoiding the noise and problems that could give checked exceptions.

On Tuesday, 2 June 2020 at 13:58:13 UTC, Bienlein wrote:
> On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 11:40:00 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:30:36 UTC, wjoe wrote:
>>>[...]
>>
>> For me, it's because they require all functions that touch them to either try/catch or include an exception specification in its declaration. In my Java days, I ended up just doing what so many others do and adding `throws Exception` or `catch(Exception)` to avoid having to handle multiple exception types. Most of the time, I didn't care what specific sort of exception was thrown.
>
> Because of the problems with checked exceptions they were deliberately left out in C#. Here is an interview with Anders Hejlsberg, the creator of C# at MS, where he explains the reasons for this decision: https://www.artima.com/intv/handcuffs.html

That was a good read. Thank you.

On Wednesday, 3 June 2020 at 07:19:45 UTC, Luis wrote:
> On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 10:30:36 UTC, wjoe wrote:
>>
>> Could you please elaborate why checked exceptions are more annoying?
>>
>
>
> Have like 3 functions : A calls B, B calls C .
> [...]
>
> I work daily with Java, and it's pretty annoying. That the IDE helps you auto putting the throws or suggesting a try/catch, helps. But we ended making some generic exceptions RuntimeExceptions to avoiding the noise and problems that could give checked exceptions.

I was thinking about IDE assistance, too, but after reading the interview with Anders Hejlsberg mentioning the ballooning problem - I can see how checked exceptions can get out of control.