On Thursday, 11 August 2022 at 23:50:58 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I think the OP's idea is somewhat different: adding contextual information to a propagating exception that the throwing code may not have access to.
Yeah, but you can use the mechanism again: you'd catch the one then throw a new one with the old one tacked on the back.
The OP's idea of wrapping throwing code with a function that tacks on extra information is a good idea.
Yeah, that is good. I also kinda wish that scope(failure) could do it so you could tack on info with a more convenient syntax... i have some more wild ideas brewing now lol
