我只是想添加一些根本不使用受控异常的理由。这不是一个完整的答案，但我觉得它确实回答了你的部分问题，并补充了许多其他的答案。

Whenever checked exceptions are involved, there's a throws CheckedException somewhere in a method signature (CheckedException could be any checked exception). A signature does NOT throw an Exception, throwing Exceptions is an aspect of implementation. Interfaces, method signatures, parent classes, all these things should NOT depend on their implementations. The usage of checked Exceptions here (actually the fact that you have to declare the throws in the method signature) is binding your higher-level interfaces with your implementations of these interfaces.

让我给你们看一个例子。

让我们有一个像这样漂亮干净的界面

public interface IFoo {
    public void foo();
}

现在我们可以编写方法foo()的许多实现，就像这样

public class Foo implements IFoo {
    @Override
    public void foo() {
        System.out.println("I don't throw and exception");
    }
}

类Foo完全没问题。现在让我们第一次尝试Bar类

public class Bar implements IFoo {
    @Override
    public void foo() {
        //I'm using InterruptedExcepton because you probably heard about it somewhere. It's a checked exception. Any checked exception will work the same.
        throw new InterruptedException();
    }
}

这个类Bar不能编译。由于InterruptedException是一个已检查异常，您必须捕获它(在方法foo()中使用try-catch)或声明您正在抛出它(在方法签名中添加抛出InterruptedException)。因为我不想在这里捕获这个异常(我希望它向上传播，这样我就可以在其他地方正确地处理它)，让我们改变签名。

public class Bar implements IFoo {
    @Override
    public void foo() throws InterruptedException {
        throw new InterruptedException();
    }
}

这个类Bar也不能编译!Bar的方法foo()不会覆盖IFoo的方法foo()，因为它们的签名不同。我可以删除@Override注释，但我想编程接口IFoo像IFoo foo;然后再决定使用哪个实现，比如foo = new Bar();如果Bar的方法foo()没有覆盖IFoo的方法foo，当我执行foo.foo();它不会调用Bar的foo()实现。

To make Bar's public void foo() throws InterruptedException override IFoo's public void foo() I MUST add throws InterruptedException to IFoo's method signature. This, however, will cause problems with my Foo class, since it's foo() method's signature differs from IFoo's method signature. Furthermore, if I added throws InterruptedException to Foo's method foo() I would get another error stating that Foo's method foo() declares that it throws an InterruptedException yet it never throws an InterruptedException.

正如您所看到的(如果我在解释这些东西方面做得不错的话)，抛出InterruptedException这样的检查异常的事实迫使我将我的接口IFoo绑定到它的一个实现上，这反过来又会对IFoo的其他实现造成严重破坏!

这就是受控异常很糟糕的一个重要原因。在帽。

一种解决方案是捕获已检查异常，将其包装在未检查的异常中，然后抛出未检查的异常。

我认为受控异常对于使用外部库的开发人员是一个很好的提醒，在异常情况下，该库中的代码可能会出错。

检查异常:

The exceptions which are checked by the compiler for smooth execution of the program at runtime are called Checked Exception. These occur at compile time. If these are not handled properly, they will give compile time error (Not Exception). All subclasses of Exception class except RuntimeException are Checked Exception. Hypothetical Example - Suppose you are leaving your house for the exam, but if you check whether you took your Hall Ticket at home(compile time) then there won't be any problem at Exam Hall(runtime).

未检查异常:

The exceptions which are not checked by the compiler are called Unchecked Exceptions. These occur at runtime. If these exceptions are not handled properly, they don’t give compile time error. But the program will be terminated prematurely at runtime. All subclasses of RunTimeException and Error are unchecked exceptions. Hypothetical Example - Suppose you are in your exam hall but somehow your school had a fire accident (means at runtime) where you can't do anything at that time but precautions can be made before (compile time).

所有异常都必须是检查异常。

Unchecked exceptions are unrestricted gotos. And unrestricted gotos are considered a bad thing. Unchecked exceptions break encapsulation. To process them correctly, all the functions in the call tree between the thrower and the catcher must be known to avoid bugs. Exceptions are errors in the function that throws them but not errors in the function that processes them. The purpose of exceptions is to give the program a second chance by deferring the decision of whether it's an error or not to another context. It's only in the other context can the correct decision be made.

为了回答最后一个问题(上面的其他问题似乎都得到了彻底的回答)，“我应该冒泡出确切的异常还是使用exception掩盖它?”

我猜你的意思是这样的:

public void myMethod() throws Exception {
    // ... something that throws FileNotFoundException ...
}

不，总是声明尽可能精确的异常，或者一个这样的列表。你声明你的方法能够抛出的异常是你的方法和调用者之间契约的一部分。抛出"FileNotFoundException"意味着可能文件名无效，无法找到该文件;调用者需要聪明地处理这个问题。抛出异常意味着“嘿，该死的事情发生了。交易。”这是一个非常糟糕的API。

在第一篇文章的注释中有一些例子，其中“throws Exception”是一个有效且合理的声明，但对于您所编写的大多数“正常”代码来说，情况并非如此。

运行时异常: 运行时异常被称为未检查的异常。所有其他例外 是受控异常，并且它们不是派生自java.lang.RuntimeException。

检查异常: 必须在代码中的某个地方捕获受控异常。如果您调用 方法，该方法引发已检查异常，但您没有捕获该已检查异常 在某些地方，您的代码将无法编译。这就是为什么他们被称为检查 异常:编译器检查以确保它们被处理或声明。

Java API中的许多方法都会抛出检查过的异常，因此您将经常编写异常处理程序来处理由您没有编写的方法生成的异常。