Making Errors errors

[Andre Pany]

On Thursday, 28 January 2021 at 17:59:41 UTC, Max Haughton wrote:
> It has been discussed in a different thread (Making throwing an 
> error an instant failure, catching Error etc.)
>
> I am starting to put together a patch to try out this 
> behaviour, what do we actually want it to do - should it call a 
> user specified handler, druntime, c etc.?
>
> The rationale makes perfect sense (Errors should indicate 
> something has gone wrong, the program is in an invalid state - 
> by definition you cannot recover), but the exact behaviour must 
> be specified.

What would be the effect of this change on the unit test runners 
we have (d-unit, silly, unit-threaded)?
This might break their functionality, as they might catch Errors 
(unit tests calling assert).

Kind regards
Andre