Re: [RFC] Optional Catch Block Body

> Of course, empty catch blocks are bad practice in most cases. But this particular proposal is > not intended to encourage these bad practices. I'm just suggesting that you don't have to > write an extra boiler plate at the syntax level in situations where it's necessary. From what I can tell, it's very rare to have empty catch blocks, and even more being done rightfully. I'd be very suspicious if I came across such code. I think the extra boilerplate is actually a good thing, showing the explicit intent to not catch the error. I get that the proposal is not intended to encourage such a thing, but I agree with Ayesh: it would definitely will.