The article claims:
"The user now has an interface value error that the only thing they can do is access the string representation of."
This is false. Didn't used to be, but that was many years ago.
"The user now has an interface value error that the only thing they can do is access the string representation of."
This is false. Didn't used to be, but that was many years ago.
It's mostly false.
Technically, if you use `fmt.Errorf`, then the caller can't get anything useful out of your errors.
Types are promises. All the `error` interface promises is a string representation. I acknowledge that most of the time there is more information available. However, from the function signature _alone_, you wouldn't know. I understand that this is more of a theoretical problem then a practical problem but it still holds (in my opinion).
(Rust then improves drastically on the situation with pattern matching, which would simply improve Go with no tradeoffs I can really discern, just so we're clear that I'm not saying Go's error story is at parity with Go. But I'd also point out that Rust error handling at a type level is kind of a painful mess as well.)
it's only present when you downcast though?