I'd argue that this is part of the (unfortunate) reality of running a global project and, as commented elsewhere, the only safe option to avoid lawsuits is to pick a set of laws (US here), have lawyers for the same and .. restrict _everyone_ not under these laws to access the resource.
If you block Germany for different copyright laws, why not France? Poland? Canada? (My naive assumption is that these laws are not the same worldwide and differ in gazillion edgecases between countries, even if otherwise somewhat compatible. That assumption might be wrong of course. IANAL)
I wonder if, given their broad reply, that project shouldn't just block everyone BUT the US, since they decided that US law is the only that applies to them.
Now, I don't like these laws one bit, but I also really don't like this (over)reaction. If your legal counsel argues that you should block a country to avoid being sued for different laws, shouldn't the same counsel point out that this is likely for most of the world?
Or is Germany the oddball here and the majority of the world doesn't have CP laws, or doesn't care or .. have laws that are literally one to one compatible with the US ones?
Standard example for exceptions you have to handle: IO. You can't work around it. Want to open a file? That might throw (file doesn't exist/is inaccessible). Want to write? That might throw.
Now, we can argue if you can ignore that, in a controlled environment, and get away with it most of the time.. But that's not what the article is about. He compares exhaustive error handling between the two languages.
Having a toplevel src/ (vs. lib/ or test/ etc) is just a convention and I have no problem with that one.
The last part of the path is required by the convention of having a unique/meaningful namespace/package name and the language requirements (not sure if I like that or not, C# doesn't have this - sometimes I love that, sometimes I curse when I search for the file that contains a certain class):
- Namespaces have to correspond to folders.
- File names have to correspond to the (first?) public class declared within.
(From memory, I hope I have no _really_ big flaws in there. Haven't touched Java for quite some time)
with that kind of comment. Impersonation is crap and childish behavio(u)r and not about being "passionate" about a site or a technology.
I don't think Quora guys are to blame, but
- These comments should be moderated/removed/shouldn't have been allowed in the first place
- Calling idiots that do things like that "passionate users" does both the service and the internet in general a disservice. They are idiots. Period. That's not funny, that's not cool or helpful. Your reply seems kind of supportive and I don't get why.
I'd argue that this is part of the (unfortunate) reality of running a global project and, as commented elsewhere, the only safe option to avoid lawsuits is to pick a set of laws (US here), have lawyers for the same and .. restrict _everyone_ not under these laws to access the resource.
If you block Germany for different copyright laws, why not France? Poland? Canada? (My naive assumption is that these laws are not the same worldwide and differ in gazillion edgecases between countries, even if otherwise somewhat compatible. That assumption might be wrong of course. IANAL)