try/catch on function block

[Thaina]

A simple syntactic sugar

public try int GetValue(int input)
{
    DoSomething(input);
    return 0;
}
catch(Exception e)
{
    Console.WriteLine("GetValue input : " + input);
}
finally
{
    return input;
}

Would be transpiled to

public int GetValue(int input)
{
    try
    {
        DoSomething(input);
        return 0;
    }
    catch(Exception e)
    {
        Console.WriteLine("GetValue input : " + input);
    }
    finally
    {
        return input;
    }
}

Should also work in local function and property?

int val;
public int Value
{
    try get
    {
        DoSomething();
        return val;
    }
    catch(Exception e)
    {
    }

    try set
    {
       DoSomething(value);
       val = value;
    }
    catch(Exception e)
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Set value " + value);
    }
}

[bondsbw]

Alternatively the following syntax might be possible with "expression-bodied everything":

public int GetValue(int input) =>
    try
    {
        DoSomething(input);
        return 0;
    }
    catch(Exception e)
    {
        Console.WriteLine("GetValue input : " + input);
    }
    finally
    {
        return input;
    };

and

int val;
public int Value
{
    get =>
        try
        {
            DoSomething();
            return val;
        }
        catch(Exception e)
        {
        };

    set =>
        try
        {
           DoSomething(value);
           val = value;
        }
        catch(Exception e)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Set value " + value);
        };
}

[MkazemAkhgary]

variables in separate blocks have different scope and lifetime. I don't think there should be an exception to this rule.

{
    int x;
}
{
    // x has no definition here.
}

On the other hand, method body should have one block. following code, body of method is fragmented across multiple blocks, imho it does not improve readability of code, it actually reduces readability.

public try int GetValue(int input)
{
}
catch {
}

[Thaina]

@MkazemAkhgary Sure

public try int GetValue(int input) // input is parameter before the scope
{
    int x;
}
catch
{
    // x has no definition here.
    return input; // but input has
}

[jnm2]

I dislike this even more than #958. We need to stop mixing method body with method signature declaration.

[gulshan]

#908 is a similar proposal.

[Thaina]

@gulshan Yeah that's right but I see no one like implicit try so I think explicit would be better