Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

As someone who spends all day volunteering in Stack Overflow I hope people providing examples were a little bit better at emphasizing error handling.

You should see the destructive effects of bad examples there.




You're welcome to add it.


In their snippet, errors would be handled altogether on the promise you get from `getJeansAndSaveThem()`.

You don't have enough information to be outraged at the toy example.


And that's a very implicit way of handling the error. Implicit behavior is good when you are encapsulating stuff (e.g: I don't need to know about the details of internal combustion engines, just pushing on the accelerator of my car so it moves forward).

But in this case encapsulation is a leaky abstraction that just makes the diagnosing of an error more cumbersome.


Oh please. The point of the post was to illustrate the feature to those wondering "what's async/await?", error handling would be complete noise for that purpose.


I would argue with you, but I don't really have to prove you wrong.

You will eventually prove yourself wrong, since deemphasizing error handling goes wrong very quickly.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: