On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Simon Sapin <simon.sa...@exyr.org> wrote: > We have some functions and methods such as > [std::str::from_utf8](http://static.rust-lang.org/doc/master/std/str/fn.from_utf8.html) > that may succeed and give a result, or fail when the input is invalid. > > 1. Sometimes we assume the input is valid and don’t want to deal with the > error case. Task failure works nicely. > > 2. Sometimes we do want to do something different on invalid input, so > returning an `Option<T>` works best. > > And so we end up with both `from_utf8` and `from_utf8`. This particular case > is worse because we also have `from_utf8_owned` and `from_utf8_owned_opt`, > to cover everything. > > Multiplying names like this is just not good design. I’d like to reduce this > pattern. > > Getting behavior 1. when you have 2. is easy: just call `.unwrap()` on the > Option. I think we should rename every `foo_opt()` function or method to > just `foo`, remove the old `foo()` behavior, and tell people (through > documentation) to use `foo().unwrap()` if they want it back? > > The downsides are that unwrap is more verbose and gives less helpful error > messages on task failure. But I think it’s worth it. > > What do you think? > > (PS: I’m guilty of making this worse in #10828, but I’d like to discuss this > before sending pull requests with invasive API changes.) > > -- > Simon Sapin
A stack trace already tells you where the error came from so I don't think it's an important consideration. Rust can provide stack traces on failure by default if that's desired. _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
