>I read it and thought that the idea that the original idea was to prefix 
>the semantic meaning, not the type was actually not a bad idea
True, and his argument was pretty convincing, but I wonder if there isn't another way to architect the whole system such that the safe/unsafe thing doesn't become  a problem at all. I dunno, I'm just babbling, really.

>A lot of people are looking at Exceptions as an ugly step-sister these 
>days
Exceptions are, I guess, different things:
1. Means to fail-fast. To me, they seem really good at this. If you have a problem, just throw an Exception, and get the heck out of there. Your application container can then catch that exception, log it, display an error message to the user, and move on to the next request.
2. Error-handling. It seems pretty bad at this. You'll find the c2 wiki littered with statements of "don't use exceptions for flow control," but flow control is exactly what you need to handle errors.
3. Checked exceptions, in particular, were an attempt to force crappy developers to handle errors. They don't seem to have achieve this end.

Devin