DIP33: A standard exception hierarchy - finally blocks not executed for Errors

[Dicebot]

On Tuesday, 2 April 2013 at 11:42:01 UTC, Don wrote:
> I think that view is reasonable, but then I don't understand 
> the reason to have Error in the first place! Why not just call 
> some kind of abort() function, and provide the ability to hook 
> into it?

I actually support something like this. While adding hooks for an 
non-recoverable error conditions is a valid use-case, it is 
better to keep it explicitly separate from usual error 
(exception) handling framework to keep clear that it is an 
advanced tool and hardly @safe.