4 ms·
Kind of an ironic reply - naming 10 Rust features and libraries vs. an `if` check in Go to argue that Rust has simpler ergonomics for throw-away code.
by rbetts 4y ago
Kind of an ironic reply - naming 10 Rust features and libraries vs. an `if` check in Go to argue that Rust has simpler ergonomics for throw-away code.
- lamontcg 4y agoMy response covered the gamut from throw away code up to error handling in professionally written code, with a diversion through "null" handling. To reiterate, for throw away code (or tests) unwrap() and panic!() will work just fine.
- aprdm 4y ago> code up to error handling in professionally written code Lol, if you knew how much python code runs the world without even checking for exceptions, or with a try/except/pass ... and the world keeps on spinning. "professionally written code" made me chuckle
- lamontcg 4y agoYeah I'm done with the trolls here.
- aquariusDue 4y agoI never understood the pearl clutching going on when people hear that Rust has different constructs for handling errors and control flow and if/else stuff is kinda an antipattern. Same kind of people that would hold dear GOTO statements in my opinion.
- lamontcg 4y agoWell the responses here are just a little bit more conviction that I'm on the right path with Rust.