Making Errors errors

[Timon Gehr]

On 29.01.21 07:03, Andre Pany wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 January 2021 at 17:59:41 UTC, Max Haughton wrote:
>> It has been discussed in a different thread (Making throwing an error 
>> an instant failure, catching Error etc.)
>>
>> I am starting to put together a patch to try out this behaviour, what 
>> do we actually want it to do - should it call a user specified 
>> handler, druntime, c etc.?
>>
>> The rationale makes perfect sense (Errors should indicate something 
>> has gone wrong, the program is in an invalid state - by definition you 
>> cannot recover), but the exact behaviour must be specified.
> 
> What would be the effect of this change on the unit test runners we have 
> (d-unit, silly, unit-threaded)?
> This might break their functionality, as they might catch Errors (unit 
> tests calling assert).

Even the language itself catches AssertError to implement in contract 
inheritance.