Why not use Result instead of Option for these types of things? Result is already defined to be able to return error codes using Err. The only way to indicate an error when returning an Option is to return None which doesn't allow for that. Also, IMO, None doesn't necessarily mean "error" to me. Lets say we have a function defined as:
fn do_something(value: Option<~str>); It seems like it would be much to easy to accidentally write something like: do_something(str::from_utf8(...)) which might result in the error being hidden since do_something might not consider None to be an error input. -Palmer Cox On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Simon Sapin <simon.sa...@exyr.org> wrote: > On 06/12/2013 21:50, Eric Reed wrote: > >> Personally, I prefer making functions that don't fail and use Option or >> Result and then composing them with functions that fail for certain >> outputs, but I think I'm in the minority there. >> > > Yes, this is what I’m suggesting. > > > -- > Simon Sapin > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > Rust-dev@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
