L
Laura Stern
Guest
Marian, it is not you. You are totally correct, and I couldn't agree with you more. But here's the story: Unfortunately, RETURN ERROR was coded this way from the beginning. I don't know why, but someone at the time obviously thought it made sense. That is ancient history, but it remained like that for many years. So when we realized that it was inconsistent, we changed it. However, customers, including one major one, as well as our internal tooling team, had already coded against the behavior that it returned the Unknown value. Therefore, by raising error in the caller, this would now kick them out of their block and completely break the existing code. It is understandable that they did not want this behavior to change. There was a huge quantity of code (we were told) that was potentially broken. And we do make the claim that we will never introduce regressions. So we had to back out the change. So there you have it. We would now entertain the idea of adding a compiler option to issue a compiler warning or error when we see this. And luckily, because we now have structured error handling, you can code it to work the way you want. Thanks for your feedback.
Continue reading...
Continue reading...