3 ms·
No, it is not ridiculous, it is meticulous. That's one style and approach in programming and not without merits. I personally like exceptions, as they enable f
by juhanima 9y ago
No, it is not ridiculous, it is meticulous. That's one style and approach in programming and not without merits.
I personally like exceptions, as they enable focusing into what's supposed to happen instead of what all could go wrong. And the abstraction power that comes with this approach.
But I wouldn't rush to say I'm right and the meticulous party is wrong. There are many instruments in the orchestra. In the end all that matters is the skill of the player.
- TheDong 9y agoExceptions are a strawman. I don't like exceptions. Go's error handling is still ridiculous. It doesn't have sum-types, it has the incredibly stupid interface/struct nil punning so you must return an interface and type-assert down, it doesn't have a tuple object being returned but actually multiple return which is a semi-broken thing, it doesn't have an either/result type or an optional type to express mutual-exclusivity / optionality.... Yeah, the whole thing is disgustingly bad. That doesn't mean I prefer exceptions. I do prefer meticulous "errors as value" error handling. Go's implementation is the worst implementation of that because the type system doesn't support various features that make handling error values better.