If "errored" is not a valid word, then how should I say:

The program errored at line 44

I guess I could say:

The program threw an error at line 44

But why is "errored" wrong? Is there a better alternative?

  • 3
    Best answer I've heard (not my own, but I like it) ... "Language is what we make of it. If "grrl" can be in the dictionary, errored can be a word." ... Yes, I'm American, can you tell? :^) – user9885 Jun 13 '11 at 18:57
  • 1
    Right click on the word. Select Add to Dictionary. Error is defined as a Noun, but we use it as a Verb, in another 10 years or so the Language Police will see the error in their ways, and allow us to use it as a Verb as well as a Noun, like Googling. merriam-webster.com/dictionary/googling – user19754 Apr 5 '12 at 20:10
  • 1
    The program suffered an error at line 44. The program committed an error at line 44. The program obtained an error at line 44. The program enjoyed an error at line 44. At line 44 the program put an error over on you. – GEdgar Apr 5 '12 at 21:11
  • 2
    In computer science, the word error has its own meaning! as work has its own meaning in physics entirely different in meaning from mainstream usage of the same word. Hence, I would be satisfied with errored or for that matter error-ed... – Vineet Menon Apr 6 '12 at 5:11
  • 1
    If it was correct, wouldn't it have another r as in errorred? – Martin Brown Nov 30 '16 at 16:28

You can actually say "The program erred at line 44", but it's not very idiomatic. "Err" also occurs in the saying "To err is human, to forgive is divine".

If you're looking for the correct idiom, you could say "the program encountered an error at line 44" or "the program hit an error at line 44", etc.

| improve this answer | |
  • 12
    I don't think "erring" and "encountering an error" mean the same thing. I would say "the program erred" only if, for example, I asked for the capital of Illinois and it told me "Chicago". – Kosmonaut Sep 15 '10 at 21:49
  • 1
    @Kosmonaut: It isn't really clear what the program did from the question. – delete Sep 16 '10 at 0:00
  • 2
    @Shinto: You don't think so? I think the author clarifies what he meant by saying that it can also be called "throwing an error". Also, what would be the use of have a message about a program "erring" on a certain line, if the "error" is not in the computer sense? – Kosmonaut Sep 16 '10 at 11:04
  • 3
    @Shinto: So, what do you mean when you say "you can actually say X, but it's not very idiomatic"? To me, that means that X is correct, but not common. I think your answer is misleading, particularly for non-native speakers who would be interested in the answer to this question. If you have no desire to defend it, then edit it out. – Kosmonaut Sep 16 '10 at 16:20
  • 2
    @NobleUplift: "Throwing/encountering an error" has a specific meaning in computing. "Erring" is something else that has much broader application; it simply means "to make a mistake". "Throwing an error" is often not something a program does by mistake. If a program tries to connect to a database and the database is not available and an error is thrown, the program has not erred. So, these terms are not interchangeable, even if in some instances you could use the broader "err". – Kosmonaut Feb 27 '14 at 15:27

I'd say errored IS a valid word. It's the past tense of the verb "to error". I've seen (well, mostly heard) this word used to mean

  • to operate incorrectly,
  • to display an error message,
  • to encounter an unexpected error,
  • to halt unexpectedly

This is a relatively recent usage of the word (I can't find any authoritative samples of it) it might be considered too informal or slangy. Also, some people might not be sure what precisely you are trying to say. Thus, you should describe more fully what the program is doing.

The program encountered an error at line 44.


Merriam-Webster (new words, slang)

The verb 'to error' has a different meaning than 'to err'. An "error" in a computer program isn't necessarily a mistake, but can be an exceptional circumstance. For example, if a program tried to open its configuration file, but you deleted it, the program might fail by displaying an error for this unexpected circumstance. You could say "the program errored." You can't say "the program erred" because the program isn't making a mistake here.

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    It's not very standard usage. "To error" might be slowly becoming a verb but most educated speakers would say that "err" is the verb. – Joel Spolsky Sep 17 '10 at 3:06
  • @Joel: I'd say it's got a different nuance than "err". And sure, I agree that it's not widespread, but I hear it a lot in computer circles. – Mr. Shiny and New 安宇 Sep 17 '10 at 13:45
  • I personally don't really like the word but use it regardless as it's concise and generic. It's a catch-all word for 'displayed an error', 'thrown an exception', 'crashed' etc. It's widely used as a word meaning 'did something wrong' without going into details as to what has actually happened. When I say 'my program errored in line 33' I expect the other person to know what I mean, otherwise I'd use another word to be more specific. – Gilead Apr 7 '12 at 2:35
  • You used different terminology in your last paragraph: "error" and "exception(al)". I could argue (and languages such as Java would support me), that an exception is not an error. Would you then support usage of "the program exceptioned"? So you are right, you cannot say "the program erred", but neither can you say "the program errored". The program threw an exception. – NobleUplift Feb 24 '14 at 21:16
  • 1
    Just because "mistake" and "error" (as nouns) are sometimes synonymous doesn't mean that "to mistake" and "to error" need to be synonymous. The verb "to error" is not used by anyone to mean "to make a mistake". If there is anything consistent about "to error" it is that it does not mean "to err". Anyway you can't use "to mistake" synonymously with "to err" either. The patterns you see do not represent some kind of linguistic design. All language is created by its users, just like "to error". – Mr. Shiny and New 安宇 Jul 23 '14 at 16:19

I've seen it enough in computing contexts that I consider it acceptable there. I wouldn't use it in other domains myself, though, except possibly in a geeky tongue-in-cheek way (e.g., "my DVD player errored out on that scratched disk.")

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    We programmers like to misuse words in this way. – Umbrella Jul 22 '14 at 20:33
  • I would not describe this as a misuse - in computing jargon, 'to error' is a verb, and 'errored' is naturally the past tense. Hard to say if this will become a general change in usage, or remain jargon of a particular industry. – LeBleu Apr 28 '15 at 17:32
  • "to error out" is not the same as "to error", just as "to poop out" is not the same as "to poop". – Theodore Norvell Nov 17 '18 at 12:43

To use "errored" you would have to consider error a verb, but the dictionary doesn't. "Error" is a noun, used to mean mistake. You wouldn't say "The program mistaked at line 44."

Your usage "threw an error" is correct, because it uses error as a noun.

| improve this answer | |
  • 10
    I have two problems with this answer. One is that lots of nouns become verbed, and often the new coining is immediately understandable (viz Calvin and Hobbes: "Verbing weirds language"). Two, dictionaries don't contain all possible words or all possible uses of words. – Mr. Shiny and New 安宇 Sep 15 '10 at 15:56
  • 1
    A lot of nouns are indeed used as verbs and the English language is dying horribly as a result. We don't need to add to the problem if we can avoid it. – Brian Hooper Sep 15 '10 at 16:21
  • 2
    I regard it as a great strength of English that it is not afraid to use nouns as adjectives or verbs, verb forms as nouns or adjectives, interjections as nouns, etc. Not every language is anywhere as flexible. I think we should embrace or at least accept such peculiarities rather than fight them. – RegDwigнt Sep 15 '10 at 19:59
  • 3
    I agree with Mr. Shiny and New. Here's a nice article on verbing. And no, the language is not dying—it's completely alive and kicking, even more so due to this phenomenon. – Jonik Sep 15 '10 at 20:17
  • 1
    Just because English frequently allows verbing, doesn't mean it always does. Not every noun can be used as a verb and still be considered "correct." – Joel Spolsky Sep 17 '10 at 3:06

You may choose one of the following options:

  • The program returned an error at line 44
  • The program generated an error at line 44
  • The program encountered an error at line 44
  • The program reached an error at line 44
  • The program gave an error at line 44
| improve this answer | |
  • Also thrown. – abatishchev Apr 13 '12 at 9:00
  • 2
    @abatishchev - FWIW, in the (past simple) examples given in this answer, thrown is incorrect... threw would be correct. – Greenonline Jul 6 '15 at 20:44

Within programming circles, I'd say that "errored" is a perfectly fine term to use. It seems to be fairly widely understood as a verb form for "error". Outside of computing, I'd probably avoid it. You generally won't hear someone say "Todd errored on his test". It's a field-specific bit of terminology.

That being said, while discussing things within the field of computing, I'd prefer "the program errored/failed/crashed" over "erred", as some others have suggested. Any of those would be concise and make sense.

I would also prefer the options above over "The program threw an error" in informal settings, simply for the fact that it's less wordy, unless the focus of the statement was how exactly the program did the throwing. In technical documents, "threw an error" might be preferable to "errored".

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    "The program threw an error" (or an exception) is to me more specific while not being inordinately wordy. "Errored" sounds like non-native speech. – Robusto Apr 8 '12 at 13:02
  • I suppose it depends on who you're talking to. I'm a native speaker and it sounds fine to me, but I know several people (myself included) who have a propensity to "verb words" as described in the Calvin and Hobbes comic linked above. – KChaloux Apr 10 '12 at 12:28
  • Verbing nouns (a.k.a. conversion) is common in English. This particular case sounds to me like something a non-native speaker would say. – Robusto Apr 10 '12 at 12:31
  • +1 This is common computer jargon, but I wouldn't use it outside the field. – Chris Sunami supports Monica Aug 25 '15 at 20:58

You can say

the program threw an error

though I'd be more inclined to use "caused", as "threw" sounds a little odd (though it is used in the context of exceptions in C++).

(You might also want to provide a more information than merely saying that an error has occurred!)

| improve this answer | |
  • 5
    "threw" is used in the context of any language that has exceptions (Java, Python, C++, etc) ... personally, I use "errored" quite frequently (and not just in my professional field) – warren Sep 16 '10 at 2:27

Personally, I prefer to say "the program failed at line 44", although I really like "the program erred at line 44" as suggested by Shinto Sherlock above :).

| improve this answer | |

Outside of the context of computer programs. errored is common expression in legal documents. For example, "We find the lower court erred in finding Larry Flint guilty of causing undue pain and suffering of Jerry Falwell"

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    lawyers love inventing new ways of saying simple things to make it seem fancy. I'm pretty sure that most legal documents would say "erred," not "errored." – Joel Spolsky Sep 17 '10 at 3:07
  • @Joel. 1. bows 2. Good point. Fixed. The spelling is different but the intent is the same and therefore I'm leaving it as an answer. – Billy ONeal Sep 17 '10 at 5:06

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.