> I haven't seen any actual data (or even arguments) why it is superior to exceptions, or which inherent problems of exceptions it solves It's faster. Doing al

> I haven't seen any actual data (or even arguments) why it is superior to exceptions, or which inherent problems of exceptions it solves It's faster. Doing all error handling via exception is not viable if you want speed. Exceptions work well for errors in the sense that these rarely happen. But using them for general "this is the bad outcome" of an operation that can happen in the hot-path is problematic. For example pythons "next()" function which raises an exception if the end of the iterator is reached, if C++ did this it just wouldn't be used. So in my opinion exceptions are nice if you want ease of use, and explicit error handling (look at rust with their question mark operation which makes it pretty easy to do) is the way to go for performance. One advantage of explicit error handling like rust does it is: it forces you to handle the error path like other business logic. Again, if you write a short script, this is annoying and doesn't get you much but if the application is very important then doing so is a good thing since it forces you to think about where which errors can happen and how you handle them. With exceptions its very easy to completely forget that a can even happen and thus they get ignored and suddenly the program crashes with a unreadable error message.