Handle arms always expect an expression type.
However, what if we don't need to have the name of the error?
Do we then not want to just have an identifier identifying the exception class.
Alternatively we can throw an error if it is not an expression type, thus always forcing an (empty) identifier.
This is better than failing silently.
Current Issue
Handle arms always expect an expression type. However, what if we don't need to have the name of the error? Do we then not want to just have an identifier identifying the exception class. Alternatively we can throw an error if it is not an expression type, thus always forcing an (empty) identifier.
This is better than failing silently.
High-level description of the feature
Either
Description of potential implementation
See generation for handle in check.