[OT] Is there a real alternative to exceptions ?

[Basile B.]

On Thursday, 16 January 2025 at 19:38:45 UTC, Derek Fawcus wrote:
> 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.
>
> Sum types?

That's not the problem. remember the example

```
a.map!(mapperFun).reduce!(reducerFun).array;
```

the problem is about keeping the same expressivity but eventually 
using another error handling system.For example imagine an error 
happens during the mapping, then what has to do the reducer ?