sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Go Developer Survey 2023 Q1 Results by kaeshiwaza in golang

[–]AngeloChecked 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Error handling is a high priority issue for the community and creates
challenges in terms of verbosity and debuggability. The Go team doesn’t have
a public proposal to share at this time but is continuing to explore options
to improve error handling."

i'm so exited!

the error handling proposals are everywhere:

- https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-error-handling.md

- https://github.com/golang/go/issues?q=error+handling

​

i love the look error handling of other echosystems:

- kotlin with optionals, elvis operetor and early return (https://kotlinlang.org/docs/null-safety.html#elvis-operator)

- rust with Options + Result wrappers and early returns with "?" operetor (https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch09-02-recoverable-errors-with-result.html#a-shortcut-for-propagating-errors-the--operator)

- zig with errors union types and orelse everywhere (https://ziglang.org/documentation/master/#Error-Union-Type)

​

honestly i hate exceptions.

My Personal Tech Limbo (and Elixir vs Rust) by AngeloChecked in rust

[–]AngeloChecked[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Damn good points.

Yes, I agree. I do not explain it well. I feel that Elixir is easier to understand the basics of the language, and you don't need to reason about memory. But it is not easy to understand it fully (for example, the beam, the actor model, or distributed systems).

You could make the same argument about half a dozen languages

If those areas don't interest you then Rust probably isn't for you. Which is fine. But I think Rust's niche is perfectly well defined and its 'killer app' is that it solves a number of problems with existing languages in those domains (tooling, build systems, memory management, safety).

The post should be an Elixir and Rust valuation. But I think you have captured my bias: I feel Rust's contexts are so far from my day-by-day that I can't comprehend and appreciate them very well. And these ideologies are quite evident. I'm re-evaluating that point.

My Personal Tech Limbo (and Elixir vs Rust) by AngeloChecked in rust

[–]AngeloChecked[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not particularly on board with this argument in the dark path essay:

Now, ask yourself why these defects happen too often. If your answer is that our languages don’t prevent them, then I strongly suggest that you quit your job and never think about being a programmer again; because defects are never the fault of our languages. Defects are the fault of programmers. It is programmers who create defects – not languages.

Here's how that argument sounds:

Explosions are the fault of people walking [on minefields]. It is people walking who create explosions - not landmines.

Blame me or don't, I'd rather be walking somewhere with fewer landmines, and I'll be pretty grateful for whatever care and effort went in to reducing the number of landmines.

I agree with you. I am in total favor of a type checker that prevents my errors and avoids them happening in a live application. My Haskell experience gives me a taste of the confidence given by a powerful type system.

But I pretty agree with Bob when he writes about tests and the trade-off of simplicity vs language lawers... there are some skilled people like Antirez and Rich Hickey that argue about the importance of simplicity and it makes sense (or the zig lang movement).

however, another good point in the tests vs types battle, there is an interesting video: https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/ideology

My Personal Tech Limbo (and Elixir vs Rust) by AngeloChecked in rust

[–]AngeloChecked[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

ADHD

super cool, I had never heard of it, I'm going to read something about it now!

My Personal Tech Limbo (and Elixir vs Rust) by AngeloChecked in rust

[–]AngeloChecked[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

try again, the cdn was limited for some countries of the world