RE: Alternatives to try/finally code structure

[Milles, Eric (TR Technology)]

Or I could still call it "push" and it could look like this:

try (field.push(value)) {
   ...
}

------

> Now imagine that try-catch-finally wrapper method was an inlined closure, and 
> it inlines the closure it receives, then you get a solution to your problem 
> with very little overhead.

This may be in alignment with what you are saying.  If I had a method 
"auto(oldValue, newValue)" that creats an inline AutoCloseable AIC instance, I 
could package up capture, mutate and restore within the enclosing scope.  
try (auto(field, value)) {
   ...
}