[tialaramex]

The criticism as I understand it isn't about where the errors are actually handled but the ceremony needed in an errors-as-values model, most obviously in Go where you've got to write a couple of lines of test and early return explicitly for each such possible error, compared to C++ where you write nothing.

Rust's Try operator is the minimal ceremony, a single question mark acknowledges that we might not succeed and if so we return early - but there was still ceremony for each such early return.

I happen to think exceptions are inherently a bad idea, but for a different reason.

[mabster]

You nailed it - that's my criticism :)

I've worked with a lot of code like this (particularly C libraries and litanies of return codes), and it's fine... But I prefer something like Java-style exceptions. And with Java lambdas or Kotlin the trend is unfortunately away from checked exceptions these days...

I too am interested in your other reasons!

[tialaramex]

See my other comment for this article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45864463

I believe that for today's large software which has multiple engineers, possibly not even working in the same group, involved in the final product, the key problem of exceptions (knowing what is or is not an "exceptional" situation for the software) is not soluble in the general case. Exceptions are a clever idea if you're a solo writing a soup to nuts piece of software, say the firmware for a thermostat, but are too flawed for the library author or the app developer.

[poncho_romero]

What reason is that?