I really don't like how this article claims that the primary issue with Go's error handling is that the syntax is too verbose. I don't really care about that.
How about:
- Errors can be dropped silently or accidentally ignored
- function call results cannot be stored or passed around easily due to not being values
- errors.Is being necessary and the whole thing with 'nested' errors being a strange runtime thing that interacts poorly with the type system
- switching on errors being hard
- usage of sentinel values in the standard library
- poor interactions with generics making packages such as errgroup necessary
How about:
- Errors can be dropped silently or accidentally ignored
- function call results cannot be stored or passed around easily due to not being values
- errors.Is being necessary and the whole thing with 'nested' errors being a strange runtime thing that interacts poorly with the type system
- switching on errors being hard
- usage of sentinel values in the standard library
- poor interactions with generics making packages such as errgroup necessary
Did I miss anything?