Exception doubt

Read the following piece of code carefully.


An attempt to compile the above class definition ...


Will cause a compiler error - non-abstract classes cannot be extended to abstract classes.

Will cause a compiler error - a constructor must be provided which may or may not throw an IOException

will cause a compiler error - a constructor must be provided which must throw an IOException or one of its super types.-answer

will not cause any compiler error. The class definition is perfectly legal.


IOException's sub type or super type. I think the extended class can throw the original type or sub type of exception from it's super class.

Hi
The subclass constructor must throw IOException or supertype

consider these two method and try to link with constructor
class A
{
void met1() throws IOException
{
throw new IOException();
}
}
class B
{
void met2() throws FileNotFoundException
{
met1();
}
}

now met2() will not be able to handle IOException
therefore it should be
void met2() throws Exception(IOException)
{
met1();
}

But you should write (IOException) instead of (Exception)

both exception and ioexception can catch IOException

doll, its like saying...



and there it blows up!

Dolly,

if you say "IOException's sub type" then just ask a question,

How would a sub-type handle a super type exception..

A simple as that..

Also it is clearly mentioned in K&B book regarding the same

Regards,
Gitesh