I got Pike's point on that, and love go overall, but this is really the topic on which I can't agree.

I got Pike's point on that, and love go overall, but this is really the topic on which I can't agree. The biggest problem with that is that throwing exceptions has a purpose : it makes errors interrupt program by default. With errors in go, that's the reverse : errors are ignored by default. Maybe it's just I'm too new in go, but I feel like I'd rather have my errors taken cautiously by default, with the possibility to ignore them (catch) than having to use variable and put if statement everywhere I care about errors (which pretty much means everywhere, in my current design style). Am I missing something, here, than can allow to avoid this verbosity ? (as for panic / recover, that's good for functions you implement yourself, but you still have to deal with errors from core / lib functions).

Posted by oelmekki on May 15, 2014, 9:22 AM

Tags

• hackernews (Other)

Related issues

• Not sure what you suggest to do.
• Why is this not yet published on the official website and why is there no CVE?
• The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained&#x2...
• The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
• (My comment is about detached houses).
• The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...