Re: [RFC] Optional Catch Block Body

Hello, Alexandre. I've heard your concerns, but I don't think this proposal will encourage other developers to ignore exceptions more often. Basically, even now, nothing can stop a developer from ignoring exceptions. He can simply leave the body of the capture block empty. And in this RFC is proposed just to allow not to write extra brackets {}. If we talk from the point of view of bad practices and applicability, then the same nullsafe operator may encourage developers to check for null less often. And this leads to problems, I personally observed this. It seems to me that the issue of bad and good practices should be the responsibility of developers. A programming language is just a tool. And there are many ways in which it can be "badly" applied. чт, 31 июл. 2025 г. в 11:51, Alexandre Daubois <alex.daubois+php@gmail.com>: > > 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. >