[OT] Is there a real alternative to exceptions ?

[monkyyy]

On Thursday, 16 January 2025 at 19:02:05 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
> I have the feeling that things like
>
> ```
> a.map!(mapperFun).reduce!(reducerFun).array;
> ```
>
> is only possible thanks to an exception system. A similar 
> expressivity looks impossible for example with the idom of 
> result tuple `(error_code, actuallResult)`.
>
> that problem is currently something rather serious, in the 
> sense that, let's say you want to make a standard library, you 
> really need to have a well defined way of handling errors.
>
> I'll be interested to read your thoughts on that topic.

1) add a error code system to the range api
2) damn the consequences have fail safe functions(1/0==int.max)
3) store errors and extra control flow in my `innate` pattern
4) nullable everywhere, range functions can react to nullable 
elements
5) preallocate some space for exceptions, cap the size of 
exception objects(assuming this is about betterc)