• 6 Posts
  • 455 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle



  • cbarrick@lemmy.worldtoRust@programming.devDioxus Labs + “High-level Rust
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Fair. But unwrap versus expect isn’t really the point. Sure one has a better error message printed to your backtrace. But IMO that’s not what I’m looking for when I’m looking at a backtrace. I don’t mind plain unwraps or assertions without messages.

    From my experience, when people say “don’t unwrap in production code” they really mean “don’t call panic! in production code.” And that’s a bad take.

    Annotating unreachable branches with a panic is the right thing to do; mucking up your interfaces to propagate errors that can’t actually happen is the wrong thing to do.


  • cbarrick@lemmy.worldtoRust@programming.devDioxus Labs + “High-level Rust
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Unwrap should literally never appear in production code

    Unwrap comes up all the time in the standard library.

    For example, if you know you’re popping from a non-empty vector, unwrap is totally the right too for the job. There are tons of circumstances where you know at higher levels that edge cases defended against at lower levels with Option cannot occur.