You're viewing a single thread.
Also Go: exceptions aren't real, you declare and handle every error at every level or declare that you might return that error because go fuck yourself.
Because that's sane and readable?
Wow. I'm honestly surprised I'm getting downvotes for a joke. Also, no. It isn't. It really isn't.
It is better than in most languages with exceptions, except from languages like Java, that require you to declare that certain method throws certain error.
It's more tedious in Go, but at the end of the day it's the same thing.
When I use someone else's code I want to be sure if that thing can throw an error so I can decide what to do with it.
Java doesn't have to declare every error at every level... Go is significantly more tedious and verbose than any other common language (for errors). I found it leads to less specific errors and errors handled at weird levels in the stack.
You know it’s social media when the one that’s right is downvoted
It's better than "invisible" exceptions, but it's still the worst "better" version. The best solution is some version of the good old Result monad. Rust has the BEST error handling (at least in the languages i know). You must handle Errors, BUT they are just values, AND there's a easy, non-verbose way of passing on the error (the ? operator).
Beyond a quick "hello world" when it came out, I've never used rust, but that sounds pretty great
I'm with you, exceptions sound good but are a bug factory.
There's nothing sane and readable about how Go insists you format dates and time. It is one of the dumbest language features I've ever seen.