On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 7:46 AM Kaveh Shahbazian
<kaveh.shahbaz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Go can already pass/pipe the result of a function, which returns multiple
> values, to another function, which accepts the same values as arguments. A
> similar mechanism can be used for handling errors, by passing/pipe them to a
> special construct.
>
> Now, assume we have a function named funcCtx:
>
> func funcCtx() (res int, err error) {
> // ...
> }
>
> Having that, these does not look that ugly:
>
> func funcCtx() (res int, err error) {
> res, return() = action()
> // or
> res, panic() = action()
> }
>
> Those statements will have an effect, only if the returned value is not nil.
> For performing some actions, before the actual return or panic:
>
> res, return({ log.Println(err) }) = action()
>
> There is this restriction, that the function that contains this block,
> funcCtx, has to return named return values - for both handling the zero
> values and having a one to one mapping between its return values and those of
> action function.
>
> Also for having a name, err in this case, that makes it clear, which variable
> we are talking about.
>
> In the proposal, it's not clear where the err variable comes from (what if
> there are three return values?)
Thanks. This idea seems somewhat similar to https://golang.org/issue/27519.
Ian
--
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/CAOyqgcXg1E6aNpcLu%2BFNSwg2GkLZQ0YLeKe2yvwUVuYyx9QVpg%40mail.gmail.com.
