public void frankTest() {
    int pageId= -1;

    List<Book> users= null;
    try {
        //Does Not Compile:  Object page=DatabaseConnection.getSpringConnection().queryForObject("SELECT * FROM bookmark_page", (rw, n) -> new Portal(rw.getInt("id"), "", users.parallelStream().filter(uu -> uu.getVbid() == rw.getString("user_id")).findFirst().get(), rw.getString("name")));

        //Compiles:
        Object page= DatabaseConnection.getSpringConnection().queryForObject("SELECT * FROM bookmark_page", (rw, n) -> { 
            try {
                final Book bk= users.stream().filter(bp -> { 
                    String name= null;
                    try {
                        name = rw.getString("name");
                    } catch (Exception e) {
                        // TODO Auto-generated catch block
                        e.printStackTrace();
                    }
                    return bp.getTitle().equals(name); 
                }).limit(1).collect(Collectors.toList()).get(0);
            } catch (Exception e) {
                // TODO Auto-generated catch block
                e.printStackTrace();
            }
            return new Portal(rw.getInt("id"), "", users.get(0), rw.getString("name")); 
        } );
    } catch (Exception e) {
        // TODO Auto-generated catch block
        e.printStackTrace();
    }
}

我使用一个名为unchecked()的重载实用程序函数来处理多个用例。

一些用法示例

unchecked(() -> new File("hello.txt").createNewFile());

boolean fileWasCreated = unchecked(() -> new File("hello.txt").createNewFile());

myFiles.forEach(unchecked(file -> new File(file.path).createNewFile()));

支持工具

public class UncheckedUtils {

    @FunctionalInterface
    public interface ThrowingConsumer<T> {
        void accept(T t) throws Exception;
    }

    @FunctionalInterface
    public interface ThrowingSupplier<T> {
        T get() throws Exception;
    }

    @FunctionalInterface
    public interface ThrowingRunnable {
        void run() throws Exception;
    }

    public static <T> Consumer<T> unchecked(
            ThrowingConsumer<T> throwingConsumer
    ) {
        return i -> {
            try {
                throwingConsumer.accept(i);
            } catch (Exception ex) {
                throw new RuntimeException(ex);
            }
        };
    }

    public static <T> T unchecked(
            ThrowingSupplier<T> throwingSupplier
    ) {
        try {
            return throwingSupplier.get();
        } catch (Exception ex) {
            throw new RuntimeException(ex);
        }
    }

    public static void unchecked(
            ThrowingRunnable throwing
    ) {
        try {
            throwing.run();
        } catch (Exception ex) {
            throw new RuntimeException(ex);
        }
    }
}

我会做一些一般的事情:

public interface Lambda {

    @FunctionalInterface
    public interface CheckedFunction<T> {

        T get() throws Exception;
    }

    public static <T> T handle(CheckedFunction<T> supplier) {
        try {
            return supplier.get();
        } catch (Exception exception) {
            throw new RuntimeException(exception);

        }
    }
}

用法:

 Lambda.handle(() -> method());

这里已经贴出了很多很棒的回复。只是试图用不同的角度来解决问题。这只是我的两毛钱，如果我哪里说错了，请指正。

在FunctionalInterface中抛出子句不是一个好主意

我认为强制抛出IOException可能不是一个好主意，原因如下

This looks to me like an anti-pattern to Stream/Lambda. The whole idea is that the caller will decide what code to provide and how to handle the exception. In many scenarios, the IOException might not be applicable for the client. For example, if the client is getting value from cache/memory instead of performing actual I/O. Also, the exceptions handling in streams becomes really hideous. For example, here is my code will look like if I use your API acceptMyMethod(s -> { try { Integer i = doSomeOperation(s); return i; } catch (IOException e) { // try catch block because of throws clause // in functional method, even though doSomeOperation // might not be throwing any exception at all. e.printStackTrace(); } return null; }); Ugly isn't it? Moreover, as I mentioned in my first point, that the doSomeOperation method may or may not be throwing IOException (depending on the implementation of the client/caller), but because of the throws clause in your FunctionalInterface method, I always have to write the try-catch.

如果我知道这个API抛出IOException怎么办

Then probably we are confusing FunctionalInterface with typical Interfaces. If you know this API will throw IOException, then most probably you also know some default/abstract behavior as well. I think you should define an interface and deploy your library (with default/abstract implementation) as follows public interface MyAmazingAPI { Integer myMethod(String s) throws IOException; } But, the try-catch problem still exists for the client. If I use your API in stream, I still need to handle IOException in hideous try-catch block. Provide a default stream-friendly API as follows public interface MyAmazingAPI { Integer myMethod(String s) throws IOException; default Optional<Integer> myMethod(String s, Consumer<? super Exception> exceptionConsumer) { try { return Optional.ofNullable(this.myMethod(s)); } catch (Exception e) { if (exceptionConsumer != null) { exceptionConsumer.accept(e); } else { e.printStackTrace(); } } return Optional.empty(); } } The default method takes the consumer object as argument, which will be responsible to handle the exception. Now, from client's point of view, the code will look like this strStream.map(str -> amazingAPIs.myMethod(str, Exception::printStackTrace)) .filter(Optional::isPresent) .map(Optional::get).collect(toList()); Nice right? Of course, logger or other handling logic could be used instead of Exception::printStackTrace. You can also expose a method similar to https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/CompletableFuture.html#exceptionally-java.util.function.Function- . Meaning that you can expose another method, which will contain the exception from previous method call. The disadvantage is that you are now making your APIs stateful, which means that you need to handle thread-safety and which will be eventually become a performance hit. Just an option to consider though.

我在课堂上遇到了这个问题。forName和Class。newInstance在lambda中，所以我做了:

public Object uncheckedNewInstanceForName (String name) {

    try {
        return Class.forName(name).newInstance();
    }
    catch (ClassNotFoundException | InstantiationException | IllegalAccessException e) {
        throw new RuntimeException(e);
    }
}

在lambda中，我没有调用Class.forName("myClass").newInstance()，而是调用uncheckedNewInstanceForName ("myClass")

你可以使用ET。ET是一个用于异常转换/转换的小型Java 8库。

对于ET，它看起来是这样的:

// Do this once
ExceptionTranslator et = ET.newConfiguration().done();

...

// if your method returns something
Function<String, Integer> f = (t) -> et.withReturningTranslation(() -> myMethod(t));

// if your method returns nothing
Consumer<String> c = (t) -> et.withTranslation(() -> myMethod(t));

ExceptionTranslator实例是线程安全的，可以由多个组件共享。如果你喜欢，你可以配置更具体的异常转换规则(例如FooCheckedException -> BarRuntimeException)。 如果没有其他可用的规则，被检查的异常将自动转换为RuntimeException。

(声明:我是ET的作者)