Greenwashing

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 5/28/20 9:42 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On Wednesday, 27 May 2020 at 23:57:00 UTC, Meta wrote:
>> What's wrong with nothrow by default? Probably 97% of code doesn't 
>> need to throw exceptions.
> 
> One point of view can be to consider the consequences of fixing code 
> that incorrectly uses the default.
> 
> If we have throws-by-default, then marking an existing non-templated 
> method `@nothrow` is not a breaking change.
> 
> If we have nothrow-by-default, then marking an existing non-templated 
> method `@throws` is a breaking change.
> 
> Another point of view could be that there's a benefit to being 
> permissive by default in terms of what the developer can do.

And that should be a breaking change. So all is good.

Changing the regime of a function from nothrow to throw is major.

I'm sympathetic with making functions nothrow the default. The reader 
and compiler taking into account the possibility of throwing is a large 
upfront tax. That should not be paid without necessity.