Feedback and comments on ARM proposal (original) (raw)

Neal Gafter neal at gafter.com
Mon Mar 9 20:25:13 PDT 2009

On the one hand, you say

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Joshua Bloch <jjb at google.com> wrote:

The proposed construct was  designed to go beyond IO-related "Closeable" resources.  ...  I sincerely hope the construct works for the great majority of block-structured resources, whether or not their close/dispose/release/whatever method is defined to throw an exception.

And then...

At this point, I think only one name will be supported (close), so the problem goes away.

You've avoided one problem by narrowing the applicability of the construct. Given your hopes (above), that is quite a drawback.

More information about the coin-dev mailing list