On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 3:31 PM Zakaria <z4k4...@gmail.com> wrote: > If the objections on the too magical handle part, why not cut that part > and retain the check part? > > Most of the time the we just forward the error on to the next level > anyway. Handling error is rarely done and should be explicit. >
It's important to note that Go has been around for >10 yrs and for the whole of that time people have proposed this same concept just with varying syntax. The concept has been debated on this list for more than a decade. The core developers are well aware of this possibility and its implications. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAAuPoqc8rgz3gmfke4mnvjNPcj%3Dr_DjfUK1GEeyVxcQXSESVJA%40mail.gmail.com.
