Re:How We Went from 30 Servers to 2: Go
by ssmoot on Wednesday March 13, 2013 @06:40PM
(#5371600)
Scala fan here. But still, I can sympathize with Go developers on getting rid of exceptions.
I don't know if Go would quite feel the same, but Scala's Try, Pattern Matching and Curried functions are stupid nice and make handling errors without exceptions feel very natural.
Took me a couple months to get there, but there you go. "Folding" out different state feels like I'm writing more robust code. Where I'm coding for a range of possibilities instead of just the golden path.
Even when I _am_ focusing on the Golden Path, features like Try[A] force me (well, warn at least) to at-least stub out the other options so I get to feel like instead of having to hammer in robustness, it's something composed instead. I can focus on making the ideal X, and handle the possibility of needing a notX as alternative realities, instead of trying to build a cyborgXYZ that can handle every potential state. If that makes any sense.
I don't know if Go would quite feel the same, but Scala's Try, Pattern Matching and Curried functions are stupid nice and make handling errors without exceptions feel very natural.
Took me a couple months to get there, but there you go. "Folding" out different state feels like I'm writing more robust code. Where I'm coding for a range of possibilities instead of just the golden path.
Even when I _am_ focusing on the Golden Path, features like Try[A] force me (well, warn at least) to at-least stub out the other options so I get to feel like instead of having to hammer in robustness, it's something composed instead. I can focus on making the ideal X, and handle the possibility of needing a notX as alternative realities, instead of trying to build a cyborgXYZ that can handle every potential state. If that makes any sense.