Re:Expectations for generics in Go 1.18
by topspin on Friday October 29, 2021 @12:50PM
(#29040732)
"Have you seen what a "rich error struct union" looks like in zig?"
No, and I'm not arguing that zig hasn't done well. I do argue that Go has not; you're only non-weird choice is to fetter code with miles of "if err ==/!=" gymnastics.
Traces are frequently very useful; precise traces have saved me a lot of pain in life. Lack of traces precludes nothing for me, but I have enjoyed the benefit of them enough times to acknowledge their great value.
Re:Expectations for generics in Go 1.18
by dnautics on Friday October 29, 2021 @06:54PM
(#29044425)
Traces are fantastic for unexpected errors. You don't need them, for example, when validating user input, which is the type of system where you want richer errors.
No, and I'm not arguing that zig hasn't done well. I do argue that Go has not; you're only non-weird choice is to fetter code with miles of "if err ==/!=" gymnastics.
Traces are frequently very useful; precise traces have saved me a lot of pain in life. Lack of traces precludes nothing for me, but I have enjoyed the benefit of them enough times to acknowledge their great value.