Syntax for returning early with an error

[quinedot]

@earthengine

Having that said, I think the keyword that we currently already have is the break . We only need to find a way to define its scope better so it is not breaking anything.

@CAD97

try {} should probably also be a valid break target, with the same success wrapping applied as on the tail expression. ( Grand evil plan: break works to return a value from the function as well, and return is just sugar for break 'fn )

Centril explored these ideas. I doubt a new keyword is warranted unless you take into consideration future goals beyond not typing Err(...)?. But not everyone is on board with the grand evil plan. If the only motivation large enough for a language addition is a grand evil plan you don't agree with, you tend to oppose said addition, even if you don't have a problem with the smaller change per se.

@steffahn

There might be some value in not adding a keyword at all and just keeping a yeet(...)? -style solution. Like in async blocks where every break point is marked with .await or in loops where every break is marked with break , this would keep a syntactically very uniform situation where in a try block, every (potential) "failure" path is marked with ? .

@lordan

It would seem to me that these are 2 orthogonal concerns: exiting a scope ( return , break , ? , .await , later on perhaps yield ), and value wrapping.

Rather than adding another keyword that conflates those two, if any a separate syntax of sorts just for the (Ok/Err/whatever) wrapping would strike me as more generally useful.

I'm personally against invisible wrapping based on context. Separating these concerns and making value wrapping ergonomic without being invisible appeals to me.