Concept proposal: Safely catching error

[Olivier FAURE via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 12:20:19 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> Hm... if you locked an object that was passed in on the stack, 
> for instance, there is no guarantee the object gets unlocked.
>

This wouldn't be allowed unless the object was duplicated / 
created inside the try block.

> Aside from the point that this still doesn't solve the problem 
> (pure functions do cleanup too), this means a lot of headache 
> for people who just want to write code. I'd much rather just 
> write an array type and be done.
>
> -Steve

Fair enough. There are other advantages to writing with "create 
data with pure functions then process it" idioms (easier to do 
unit tests, better for parallelism, etc), though.