nothrow by default

[Walter Bright]

On 1/4/2020 3:06 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Saturday, 4 January 2020 at 21:38:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> The short rationale is that exceptions being a "pay only if you use them" is a 
>> complete fraud. They're expensive to support, meaning performance programs use 
>> other ways of signalling errors and use nothrow.
> 
> There's more to code than performance. D is an all-purpose language.
> 
> But anyway, D still allows throwing from nothrow, but only if it is the Error 
> class. I presume that would not change.

I've been thinking about getting rid of Error entirely, and instead using a 
scheme that calls a user-supplied function when things go that wrong. (Error is 
non-recoverable.)


> But my worry on nothrow by default in general is then more D code will just 
> become fragile since other error methods have historically meant they simply get 
> ignored and not even reported.... barring something like those newfangled type 
> based systems that's probably what we'd become too.

It shouldn't become fragile, because the compiler will reject nothrow code on 
the call stack if an exception is thrown.