Never-returning functions

[Enamex via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Tuesday, 2 August 2016 at 15:18:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> What's wrong with assert(0) that you need to have a wrapper 
> function for it?
>
> -Steve

Nothing wrong exactly. I just wanted some descriptive terms to 
use in some places. Like "unreachable()" or "unimplemented()".

To be clear (and correct my original post now that I see it may 
have alluded to this), I want to say a function always 'throws', 
not necessarily asserts.