Possibility of adopting Rust's Error Handling?
user1234
user1234 at 12.de
Thu Mar 31 21:35:00 UTC 2022
On Thursday, 31 March 2022 at 21:21:04 UTC, mee6 wrote:
> Rust's error handling is pretty good, I think they've proved
> the use of Result!(T, E). I was just always getting informative
> messages from the get go. I think there's a @nogc exception DIP
> in the works but I think this way of handling errors is better.
>
> I won't go too much into detail of rust as this website does a
> good job of going over it.
>
> https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch09-00-error-handling.html
>
> Anyways this could be adopted instead of trying to get @nogc
> exceptions working. Rust uses exceptions but only for panic!()
> Which terminates the application. All it does is rewind the
> stack to see all the function calls for debugging pretty much.
>
> I also think it works with chaining functions as that's what
> Rust does a lot too. They have a `?` operator that does
> basically this boiler plate code.
>
> ```d
> auto result = expr;
> if (result.isErr())
> return result;
> ```
>
> D could implement this fairly easily and without much
> intrusion, but it would add a lot of value to be able to do
> something like:
>
> ```rust
> auto value = chain()?.funcs()?;
> ```
yikes, I'd prefer if D could use `?` for [safe navigation].
> While being @nogc and without using exceptions. Other than for
> panics.
[safe navigation]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_navigation_operator
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list