Issue #10042 has been updated by Charles Nutter.


At the very least, we should introduce a syntax for rescuing a specific exception type, and warn when users don't use that syntax. The syntax proposed by Boris isn't too bad.

I wonder if there's a way we could make postfix rescue turn off backtraces downstream. If downstream code passes through another rescue, the optimization would be turned off because that rescue might want the trace.

----------------------------------------
Feature #10042: Deprecate postfix rescue syntax for removal in 3.0
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10042#change-49893

* Author: Charles Nutter
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Category: core
* Target version: next minor
----------------------------------------
The postfix rescue notation is convenient...but almost always is a really bad antipattern.

An example of the notation:

    Integer(f) rescue f # returns f if it is not parseable as an Integer

It silently ignores all StandardError raised by a piece of code...which often covers *many* more exceptions than the user *wants* to be ignoring.

It also hides the cost of constructing and throwing away all those ignored exceptions.

I believe Matz has even said in the past that he regrets adding the feature.

In any case, I propose that "rescue nil" should be deprecated with a warning (either always on or only when verbose) and we should plan to remove it in 3.0.

Who's with me?!



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/