Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove unwraps in habor-client #101

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 25, 2024
Merged

Remove unwraps in habor-client #101

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 25, 2024

Conversation

benthecarman
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link
Contributor

@futurepaul futurepaul left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

not sure I understand the upside here... is there any valid reason for msg to ever fail? why not just turn that original unwrap into an expect, that way you don't have to do all these new expect for all these random unrelated cases?

I think it would be different if you wanted to enumerate specific errors and handling them, but this just seems to be a reshuffling

@benthecarman
Copy link
Contributor Author

not sure I understand the upside here... is there any valid reason for msg to ever fail? why not just turn that original unwrap into an expect, that way you don't have to do all these new expect for all these random unrelated cases?

I think it would be different if you wanted to enumerate specific errors and handling them, but this just seems to be a reshuffling

this is basically exchanging unwraps in the client for the ui. I thought this was better because we can then go and handle those with the UI instead of just crashing in the backend.

@futurepaul futurepaul merged commit 8c6c0f6 into master Nov 25, 2024
2 checks passed
@futurepaul futurepaul deleted the reduce-unwraps branch November 25, 2024 00:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants