On Sat, 2015-03-14 at 09:56 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 3/14/15 1:40 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 16:13 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
> > wrote:
> >> On 3/13/15 2:22 PM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 10:31 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
> >>> wrote:
> >>> […]
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> File("/tmp/a").byChunk(4096).joiner.startsWith(s)
> > […]
> >>
> >> How do you mean "conversely"? Maybe you meant "incidentally"? -- Andrei
> >
> > In functional languages, each stage in the pipeline returns Option to
> > avoid error handling. Go does not give you this facility as it refuses
> > to allow activity without proper error checking.
>
> Go does not give you this facility for a multitude of reasons, starting
> with its lack of generic programming.This is not the reason, although it is a huge factor, the following is… > > > So if byChunk returns a failed read, functional language just carry on, > > Go would force the error check, D does… > > D throws an exception. Is that good or bad? Works for me, unacceptable in Go which forbids exceptions for anything other than termination. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:[email protected] 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
