> De: "Brian Goetz" <[email protected]> > À: "Guy Steele" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Remi Forax" <[email protected]>, "amber-spec-experts" > <[email protected]> > Envoyé: Jeudi 3 Septembre 2020 21:13:56 > Objet: Re: [pattern-switch] Opting into totality
> Indeed, after serialization, statements probably go next on the list of "gifts > that keep on giving." Languages that avoided this mistake have a leg up on > languages that didn't. The idea of checked exceptions is worst, you can not compose methods because of that. Rémi >>> On Sep 3, 2020, at 2:16 PM, Brian Goetz < [ mailto:[email protected] | >>> [email protected] ] > wrote: >>> That came up in the expression switch exploration. The thinking then, which >>> I >>> think is still valid, that it is easier to understand the difference when >>> default-totality is attached to the expression versions, because expressions >>> _must_ be total and statements totally make sense to be partial. >> Which, many theorists would say, is an indictment of statements (both >> generally >> and in this specific instance).
