> Not really? That’s just merging error sets, but you can’t say that you’ve got an error which originally comes from an other error, except by creating its dual

> Not really? That’s just merging error sets, but you can’t say that you’ve got an error which originally comes from an other error, except by creating its dual and documenting it as such. Essentially your choices are full transparency or full type erasure. What you just described are error traces. They're generated by Zig auomatically for you, thanks also to the fact that errors are a special construct in the language. Relevant langref passage: https://ziglang.org/documentation/master/#Error-Return-Traces https://ziglang.org/documentation/master/#Error-Return-Trace...