Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
For example, many methods in frameworks/JDK might throw
java.lang.SecurityException
but this is not indicated in the method signature (since that is a practice normally reserved for checked exceptions).
I want to argue that declaring RuntimeExceptions in method sigs has many benefits (akin to static type checking for example). Am I drunk or otherwise?
I would not declare an unchecked exception in the signature, since it is misleading to the user of that API. It is no longer obvious whether the exception has to be explicitly handled.
Declaring it in the javadoc is a better approach since it allows someone to handle it if they think it is necessary, but knowing they can ignore it if they want. This makes the separation between checked and unchecked clear.