> Simple: it will be deleted from your source code.
> The only way to ensure your program meets its requirements is to absolutely forbid code that fails to do so. With Vigil, this shall be done for you automatically. After enough runs, Vigil promises that all remaining code meets its oaths.
Vigil: The eternal morally vigilant programming language - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25052001 - Nov 2020 (34 comments)
Vigil, the eternal morally vigilant programming language - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24967144 - Nov 2020 (2 comments)
Vigil, the eternal morally vigilant programming language - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20451115 - July 2019 (1 comment)
Vigil, the eternal morally vigilant programming language - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15209452 - Sept 2017 (48 comments)
Vigil: A programming language with eternal moral vigilance - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5002597 - Jan 2013 (118 comments)
This would make it possible for a programmer to redeem themselves.
Of course, you could probably do a git difference... but that's not as thematically consistent.
Vigil: THE HERESY MUST BE PURGED
Surely the failure is in the lack of handling, not in the throwing of the exception itself? I suppose the lack of checked exceptions in Python makes it impossible to blame the handler because there is no way to indicate what exceptions may be thrown.
And Brilliant!
Also... deeply, deeply disturbing... on many levels... <g>
(But then, sometimes some of the best humor is inseparable from being deeply disturbing on many levels...)
Kudos to the sick, but funny (but still sick, let's not kid ourselves!) mind or group of minds that concocted this!
You guy(s) are extremely funny, brilliant, and funny(!) -- but (and it pains me to say this!) also deeply, deeply disturbed...
Which I, then again, suppose is a hallmark of great comedy... I mean, I can think of SNL and Monty Python sketches that were extremely funny -- yet also deeply, deeply disturbing on many levels...
So, perhaps it is a hallmark of comedic brilliance...
But then again, perhaps it is a hallmark of sickness...
This we don't know -- but we do know that it is funny, and we do know that it is hilarious! <g> :-) <g>
Why can't you narrow down numeric types to provide range checking?