On Monday, 2 October 2023 at 12:00:35 am UTC+11 Axel Wagner wrote:
On Sun, Oct 1, 2023 at 2:37 PM Jerry Londergaard <[email protected]> wrote: I've been thinking about this point as well lately. I think I understand (at least some of) the conditions under which you would call a panic(), but I still don't quite grok why it's better than returning an error if that error is properly handled. If I panic(), then no defer() statements will be called, and I don't give any chance to the calling code to cleanup etc. `panic` does call defered functions. You're right, I wonder how I came to this completely wrong conclusion?? Anyway, thanks for your insights, they are much appreciated. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/c78b000c-bf88-495d-9621-58a4a05c518dn%40googlegroups.com.
