3 ms·

Posted this because of the other Go error handling post today https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44171677 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44171677 I lik

Posted this because of the other Go error handling post today https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44171677 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44171677 I like error wrapping. I've worked in codebases where systems had to be debugged by piecing together individual log lines. With error wrapping I can usually see the exact path that lead to the error in one line.

glenjamin 1y ago
It would be cool if someone could come up with a way for the runtime system to automatically wrap errors with the calling context. That way you’d be able to trace the stack of functions that were involved in passing an error back up to the place where it’s actually handled.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- Sarkie 1y ago
  It's a bold idea cotton
- __s 1y ago
  It's possible, stdlib just doesn't do it https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/pkg/errors https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/pkg/errors
  - elcritch 1y ago
    It's sarcasm I believe, they used to call this exceptions. ;)
danesparza 1y ago
"With error wrapping I can usually see the exact path that lead to the error in one line" This is called a stack trace, and I agree it can be very useful (if the developers were thoughtful about their error handling)
- anttiharju 1y ago
  I suppose I phrased this poorly. Stack traces are useful indeed. I guess what I like that usually wrapped errors are bit more thoughtful, stack traces can look a bit like "vomit".
  - RSHEPP 1y ago
    from my experience of late, engineers usually toss stack traces into LLMs and ask what the issue is. good error wrapping, engineers grep for one of the first errors and get to the error code right away. both ways work.
    - sfn42 1y ago
      If you can't read a stack trace without an LLM you're not an engineer.
      - danesparza 1y ago
        Counterpoint: You might also just be working on an exceptionally bad codebase or with an exceptionally bad runtime (I'm looking at you C/C++ or minified Javascript)
        sfn42 1y ago
        Sure, if the stack trace doesn't have any useful information then it's not useful. In my experience it's usually useful though, it usually tells you both what the problem is and where it is. Sadly a lot of people just don't even try to read them.
- eschatology 1y ago
  Stack trace is much more verbose and shows the symbols leading to the failing function call The error wrapping(s) produce a log line containing a brief message from each layer in the codebase that expected no errors — subtle difference but one is a dump and the other is much more meaningful.

glenjamin 1y ago

It would be cool if someone could come up with a way for the runtime system to automatically wrap errors with the calling context. That way you’d be able to trace the stack of functions that were involved in passing an error back up to the place where it’s actually handled.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Sarkie 1y ago
It's a bold idea cotton
__s 1y ago
It's possible, stdlib just doesn't do it https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/pkg/errors https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/pkg/errors
- elcritch 1y ago
  It's sarcasm I believe, they used to call this exceptions. ;)

danesparza 1y ago

"With error wrapping I can usually see the exact path that lead to the error in one line" This is called a stack trace, and I agree it can be very useful (if the developers were thoughtful about their error handling)

anttiharju 1y ago
I suppose I phrased this poorly. Stack traces are useful indeed. I guess what I like that usually wrapped errors are bit more thoughtful, stack traces can look a bit like "vomit".
- RSHEPP 1y ago
  from my experience of late, engineers usually toss stack traces into LLMs and ask what the issue is. good error wrapping, engineers grep for one of the first errors and get to the error code right away. both ways work.
  - sfn42 1y ago
    If you can't read a stack trace without an LLM you're not an engineer.
    - danesparza 1y ago
      Counterpoint: You might also just be working on an exceptionally bad codebase or with an exceptionally bad runtime (I'm looking at you C/C++ or minified Javascript)
      - sfn42 1y ago
        Sure, if the stack trace doesn't have any useful information then it's not useful. In my experience it's usually useful though, it usually tells you both what the problem is and where it is. Sadly a lot of people just don't even try to read them.
eschatology 1y ago
Stack trace is much more verbose and shows the symbols leading to the failing function call The error wrapping(s) produce a log line containing a brief message from each layer in the codebase that expected no errors — subtle difference but one is a dump and the other is much more meaningful.