alt Hacker NewsI have hard time understanding why they didn't go with
func printSum(a, b string) error {
x := strconv.Atoi(a) or {
return error
}
y := strconv.Atoi(b) or {
return error
}
fmt.Println("result:", x + y)
return nil
}
Replies
arp242 • 06/03/2025
You need to assign the error to a variable, probably. So it would have to be more something like:
n := strconv.Atoi(s) or |err| {
return fmt.Errorf("foo: %w", err)
}
n := strconv.Atoi(s) or |err| {
if !errors.Is(err, pkg.ErrFoo)
return fmt.Errorf("foo: %w", err)
}
}
I'm just making up syntax here to illustrate the point; doesn't look too brilliant to me. A func might be a bit more "Go-like":
n := strconv.Atoi(s) or func(n int, err error) {
return fmt.Errorf("foo: %w", err)
}
alanbernstein • 06/03/2025
Seems like it's only worth the cost of the change if it removes all three verbose lines per check, this only removes one.
shivamacharya • 06/03/2025
If you do this, returning the error last is now part of the language rather than a convention. You’d be making a pretty large language change.. and for what? One line of code that’s already folded away by any modern editor?
wredcoll • 06/03/2025
Oh cool, you've reinvented perl.
> Unfortunately, as with the other error handling ideas, this new proposal was also quickly overrun with comments and many suggestions for minor tweaks, often based on individual preferences. Ian closed the proposal and moved the content into a discussion to facilitate the conversation and to collect further feedback. A slightly modified version was received a bit more positively but broad support remained elusive.
> After so many years of trying, with three full-fledged proposals by the Go team and literally hundreds (!) of community proposals, most of them variations on a theme, all of which failed to attract sufficient (let alone overwhelming) support, the question we now face is: how to proceed? Should we proceed at all?
> We think not.