I am not in any sort of "camp", in fact I prefer using a mostly functional style. The above comment was based on experience working in large (~100M LoC) code ba

I am not in any sort of "camp", in fact I prefer using a mostly functional style. The above comment was based on experience working in large (~100M LoC) code bases. As the comment clearly indicates, it is about anemic/"naive" functional error handling not being the counterpoint to general-purpose exceptions, not functional error handling vs. exceptions in general. I do mostly prefer error handling being explicitly marked at every call site (ie. the functional style), but note that this is not always meaningfully possible in very large systems (at least beyond the notion of "I do not know exactly what errors are possible here, just propagate whatever happens" which is equivalent to regular exception handling) And, as I already mentioned in the original, Rust does have functional solutions to some of these problems, and as other comments indicate, eg. Scala has them as well (probably even theoretically better since it can be a strict superset of the existing zero-cost exception model in the JVM).