Remove 'throws Exception' from Pointer::close

[osialr]

Pointer throws a RuntimeException on close. Removing the throws
allows the user's try-with-resource blocks not require a catch(Exception)

[saudet]

I've thought about that myself, but if we do that, then it becomes impossible to override the close() method with a checked exception, like IOException, so everything would need to be wrapped in a RuntimeException or something. Is this really wise?

On the other hand, it is possible to override the close() method to get rid of the throws Exception, so depending on the need of each class, it seemed to me that this way the user was less limited, for example:

public NoThrowClass extends Pointer {
    @Override public void close() { super.close(); }
}

public CustomThrowClass extends Pointer {
    @Override public void close() throws CustomException { super.close(); }
}

[osialr]

I see your point and that adding this could be a breaking change. My reasoning was that deallocate() can't throw Exception so I propagated that same attribute up to close()

A custom class could override close() to remove the throws. But the auto-generated are still stuck with Exception.

The Parser could add a throw-less close to each autogenerated struct:

@Override
void close() { 
    try {
        super.close();
    } catch (Exception e) { 
       throw new RuntimeException(e);
    }
}

[saudet]

Right, super.close() throws, so actually:

@Override public void close() { deallocate(); }

Not so bad if we needed it I thought.

[saudet]

It's a bit like the case of the position(int position) method. It obviously can't return anything but itself, in the type of the current class, but we have to add a line in the subclass to cast it explicitly...

[osialr]

Well not calling super.close() is bad form in the general case. However, I will try to work something out to go along with #86 for C-struct based classes. I think my usages can be solved adding this.

[saudet]

I've given this some more thoughts. Since Pointer.deallocate() via close() is meant to execute a C++ destructor, we shouldn't be seeing exceptions thrown from there. Users that want to wrap something like std::fstream::close() that does throw exceptions, can still do so via some higher-level wrapper class in Java. So, let's make Pointer simpler to use. Thanks for bringing this up!