3 ms·
From those examples, I think only request and task should deal with panics. Things that start threads or processes. Other points of "catch all errors" don't ne
by the_gipsy 4y ago
From those examples, I think only request and task should deal with panics. Things that start threads or processes.
Other points of "catch all errors" don't need that. And then there are a lot of places where you do handle errors, if they are conceptually a Result. I know you can just catch SpecificError, but the ergonomics are just horrible in terms of control flow.
- groestl 4y agoI don't think threading is relevant to this. > there are a lot of places where you do handle errors, if they are conceptually a Result Yet, what's conceptually a result lies in the eye of the beholder, and should not be dictated by an API designer IMHO. Rust's ? is a step in the right direction, but I'd argue since you care about specific errors in maybe 0.1% of invocations tops (in production code), and that's a stretch, the ? should actually work the other way round. And if the mechanism does not provide a way to select specific errors (such as a proper catch clause) the errors it exposes as a result should include runtime errors as well.