3 ms·

> That may get you through if there is only one x.Close, but now you have to offer the guarantee to the callers that there will only ever be one Close error ret

> That may get you through if there is only one x.Close, but now you have to offer the guarantee to the callers that there will only ever be one Close error returned. No you don't. It's a multierror, a feature of the standard library. errors.Is( errors.Join(ErrA, ErrB, ErrC, errors.Join(ErrD, ErrE, ErrF)), ErrF) is true. This is a feature in the standard library. > Implying that you are a lone wolf developer? You know that's not true from the history of the repository. We do have coding standards that reviewers enforce, this is one of them.

randomdata 2y ago
> It's a multierror, a feature of the standard library. Understood (I read the code), but that doesn't help, and really has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Is the problem here that you don't have an understanding of what we're talking about? > You know that's not true from the history of the repository. Which is why the claim was identified as being strange and in need of clarification. How can "If I'm going to do something upstream based on the error, I use a type." be true? If there are many developers, you don't get to control the upstream.