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")

可以使用取消抛出包装器

Function<String, Integer> func1 = s -> Unthrow.wrap(() -> myMethod(s));

or

Function<String, Integer> func2 = s1 -> Unthrow.wrap((s2) -> myMethod(s2), s1);

一些提供的解决方案使用E的泛型参数来传递抛出的异常类型。

更进一步，不是传递异常的类型，而是传递异常类型的Consumer，如……

Consumer<E extends Exception>

您可以创建几个Consumer<Exception>的可重用变体，这些变体将覆盖应用程序的常见异常处理需求。

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.

对我来说，首选的解决方案是使用Lombok。这是一个很好的图书馆。

而不是:

Integer myMethod(String s) throws IOException

你会有

import lombok.SneakyThrows;

@SneakyThrows
Integer myMethod(String s)

异常仍然被抛出，但您不需要使用throws声明它。

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")