Proposal: Automatic Resource Management

Stephen Colebourne scolebourne at
Sat Mar 7 10:31:31 PST 2009

Neal Gafter wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Joshua Bloch <jjb at> wrote:
>> Agreed.  I like the solution in the "Additional Features" section of the
>> proposal entitled "Retaining suppressed exceptions."  If there are no
>> compelling objections, I'll promote this to the body of the proposal in the
>> next revision (and fill in the details).
> I don't see how that solves the problem.  Are you suggesting that
> everywhere someone handles an exception they should also check for a
> chain of ignored exceptions and log them?  That doesn't seem very DRY.

The problem is complicated in a different way in BGGA/JCA control 

While BGGA/JCA can have a 'manage resource and log exceptions' API as 
well as a 'manage resource and ignore exceptions' API, the problem is 
which is the default? Developers now have to choose one API over 
another. And with the logging case they might well have to write their 
own version that writes to their particular logger. More work.

So, while its a Good Thing that you /can/ write your own version of the 
API with your own exception handling, it could make the users life 
harder. Pros and Cons.


More information about the coin-dev mailing list