Raymond Chen's take on so-called zero cost exceptions

[meta]

On Tuesday, 1 March 2022 at 10:27:10 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
> On Tuesday, 1 March 2022 at 07:50:27 UTC, forkit wrote:
>>
>> We need to refocus on why exception handling was introduced, 
>> and not just on it's 'cost'.
>>
>
> Yes, features always comes at a cost. Bounds checking costs CPU 
> cycles but most people are OK with the extra cost.
>
> Another thing that I don't understand. Exceptions have been 
> around for a long time. In the 90s and beginning of 2000s there 
> wasn't much talk about the cost of exceptions. 20 years later 
> and computers are a magnitude faster, suddenly exceptions are 
> too expensive.

You can disable bounds checking, and it's not the same, you know 
before hand the cost and how it affects your program as a whole, 
which is not the case for exception handling

It also is a way to design your software, proper error handling 
is verbose but leads to better and more portable results, syntax 
is simpler, easier to read and to follow

With exception handling, you never know what will throw, or if 
something was already catched, or if you catch or cast the wrong 
Base type, etc (thanks OOP for yet another level of complexity 
btw)

Error codes are just better in every aspects, scales from 
embedded to what ever complex solution you have

They are even better when the language understands what is an 
'error' at the semantic level

Again, error handling is better in every aspects

Also my use cases for D are system level softwares 
(graphics/audio engine, low level networking, automation)

I should mention that I'm not asking for enforcing error handling 
to everyone, I just want to make sure I can live and keep 
programming by not having to use exceptions at all :)

Also It is a personal opinion, you can't make me use them if I 
consider it to be a bad practice, even if some people disagree 
with that statement