I looked at the long list of proposals to improve error handling in go but I have not seen the one I am describing below. If I missed a similar , can you pls direct me to where I can find it. If not what do you think of this approach.
This involves introducing a new keyword "orelse" that is a syntactic sugar for an "if err!=nil" block. The example code in Russ Cox's paper[1] will look something like this: func CopyFile(src, dst string) error { r, err := os.Open(src) orelse return err defer r.Close() w, err := os.Create(dst) orelse return err defer w.Close() err = io.Copy(w, r) orelse return err err = w.Close() orelse return err } It is an error to not return an error from an orelse block. In my eyes, this has the same explicitness and flexibility of the current style but is significantly less verbose. It permits ignoring the error, returning it as is or wrapping it. Because orelse is not used for any other purpose, it would be easy for reviewers and linters to spot lack of error handling. It also works well with named returns. e.g., func returnsObjorErro() (obj Obj, err error) { obj, err := createObj() orelse return //returns nil and err } otherwise orelse is like "else" so e.g., it can be followed by a block if additional cleanup or error formatting etc is needed before returning, eg w, err := os.Create(dst) orelse { .... return err } Similarity to "else" hopefully means that it is easy to learn. It is obviously backward compatible What do you think? [1] https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-error-handling-overview.md -- 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/18e49891-9012-433d-89ce-3dfcc0625cedn%40googlegroups.com.