However, this is a poor example and a misuse of panic and recover as exceptions.
See https://golang.org/doc/effective_go.html#panic
The example will be invalid soon with the release of go 1.11 as well. The
panic/recover was removed from the unmarshal code. See master's
So no, panic and recover are not meant to be used as control flow. Yes, they CAN be used that way. I also CAN use pythons `eval` a lot, use a scripting language as my command line interpreter, or make an apple-pie with onions and garlic.
As for why `recover` exists in the first place: Packages should have the ability to stop internal panics. There are various reasons for that, some worse than other. For example it is probably okay if a package doing sensor readouts recovers from a division by zero and replaces it with an error saying that the sensor value makes no sense.
And another quick googling turns up this:
https://github.com/golang/go/issues/26799
which says:
So no, panic and recover are not meant to be used as control flow. Yes, they CAN be used that way. I also CAN use pythons `eval` a lot, use a scripting language as my command line interpreter, or make an apple-pie with onions and garlic.As for why `recover` exists in the first place: Packages should have the ability to stop internal panics. There are various reasons for that, some worse than other. For example it is probably okay if a package doing sensor readouts recovers from a division by zero and replaces it with an error saying that the sensor value makes no sense.