News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Java 8’s new Optional type doesn't solve anything. Parent comment

Re:Java 8’s new Optional type doesn't solve anything by Gankro on Monday October 26, 2015 @11:35AM (#10452095)
What have I diluted the meaning of errors to?

Rust doesn't remove bounds checks in --release. It's wrapping that gets turned on in release. I'm not sure why you're distinguishing overflow as truly exceptional, as opposed to any other "this should never happen" error?

Also I don't think many C libraries that allocate expose that as a failure condition (I've certainly seen some which don't even check!)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Java 8’s new Optional type doesn't solve anything by valarauca1 on Monday October 26, 2015 @11:47AM (#10452172)
>Also I don't think many C libraries that allocate expose that as a failure condition (I've certainly seen some which don't even check!)

This is a very common mistake in most C code. Malloc can fail, and it return NULL when it does.

[ Parent | on HN ]