Worst ideas/features in programming languages?

[arco]

On Tuesday, 9 November 2021 at 11:37:49 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
> On Monday, 8 November 2021 at 14:23:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
> wrote:
>> On Monday, 8 November 2021 at 14:08:32 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>>> I thought Rust error handling wasn't easy by default until 
>>> they added the ? operator, at which point it became like 
>>> exceptions but better.
>>
>> Looks like syntactical sugar to me, but I am no Rust expert.
>
> Correct, but then again, anything other than machine code is 
> syntatical sugar. So is `throw new Exception("oh noes");`
>
>> It means you now loose context
>
> I don't see how.
>
>> and how do you log?
>
> The same way in pretty much any and all programs written that 
> handles exceptions - some outer loop, possibly in the main 
> function.
>
>>> To me that was always the issue with error handling without 
>>> exceptions - how to easily just propagate it up (nearly 
>>> always what one wants to do). I think they nailed it.
>>
>> For simple situations maybe, but it looks like a hack, as far 
>> as I can tell from the docs.
>
> I disagree. To me, it has all the convenience of exceptions 
> with none of the drawbacks.

Actually, Rust also has exceptions but like Go, it's ashamed to 
admit it:

https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/panic/fn.catch_unwind.html

It's supposed to be used only for unrecoverable runtime errors 
(panics in Rust parlance).