Chronos VS errcheck

Compare Chronos vs errcheck and see what are their differences.

Our great sponsors
  • Onboard AI - Learn any GitHub repo in 59 seconds
  • InfluxDB - Collect and Analyze Billions of Data Points in Real Time
  • SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews
Chronos errcheck
1 9
407 2,156
- -
3.9 0.0
over 1 year ago 1 day ago
Go Go
MIT License MIT License
The number of mentions indicates the total number of mentions that we've tracked plus the number of user suggested alternatives.
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.


Posts with mentions or reviews of Chronos. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects.

We haven't tracked posts mentioning Chronos yet.
Tracking mentions began in Dec 2020.


Posts with mentions or reviews of errcheck. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2023-08-01.
  • Golang panics in libraries
    5 projects | | 1 Aug 2023
    And we also expect that the caller will check the error and handle it. There is a popular linter that checks it for us: errcheck.
  • Is it a bad convention to overwrite err variable?
    2 projects | /r/golang | 28 Jun 2023
    You should be using golangci-lint, because all serious Go programmers should. golangci-lint contains errcheck, which will detect if you overwrite an error without having done something with it in the meantime. I consider this one of the most important linters (this doesn't just detect things that may sorta kinda someday turn into bugs, this quite likely is a bug RIGHT NOW), and it helps you have the confidence you can overwrite errors as you go and don't need to keep allocating new ones.
  • Luciano Remes | Golang is π˜Όπ™‘π™’π™€π™¨π™© Perfect
    7 projects | /r/golang | 2 Jan 2023
    errcheck has a flag for that ;)
  • Proposal: Go 2: Lightweight anonymous function syntax
    2 projects | | 20 May 2022, which is in most of the combined linter packages by default.

    We'll agree to disagree about unused imports; imports have can side-effects.

  • Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang
    13 projects | /r/programming | 29 Apr 2022
    I prefer functions returning errors over throwing exceptions. Whether it's Go's errors or ML-style options/results, they're both better than exceptions. I cannot remember the last time I had a bug from not checking an error in Go. There's also errcheck which I use as part of my linting that will catch unchecked errors, such that I cannot even commit the code.
  • I Want Off Mr. Golang's Wild Ride
    3 projects | | 28 Apr 2022
    > Go compiler raise an error if a variable (error) goes unused

    It doesn't though. It's perfectly valid to not use the return value of a function that only returns an error, for instance.

    There are static error checking tools you can use like to work around this, but most people don't use them.

    I've run into a lack of Go error checking many times. Many times it's just the trivial case, where the compiler doesn't warn about not checking the result of an error-returning function.

    But often it'll be subtler, and the result of Go's API design. One example is its file writing API, which requires you to close the file and check its error to be correct. Many times people will just `defer file.Close()`, but that isn't good enough - you're ignoring the error there.

    Worse still is e.g: writing to a file through a bufio.Writer. To be correct, you need to remember to flush the writer, check that error, then close the file and check that error. There's no type-level support to make sure you do that.

  • Trying Out Generics in Go
    7 projects | | 16 Dec 2021
    I'd be really happy with that! Building the functionality of errcheck[1] and ineffassign[2] into the compiler β€” or at the very least, into govet β€” would go a long way to allay my worries with Go.

    I think the reason they don't do this is that it's a slight (albeit a very tiny one) against Go's philosophy of errors being values, just like any other. While the `error` type is standard and used throughout Go source code, it still just has a simple three-line definition[3] and is not treated as a special case anywhere else; there is nothing stopping you from returning your own error type if you wish. A third-party linter could simply check for the `error` type specifically, but the first-party tools should not, and there's nothing like Rust's `#[must_use]` attribute that could be used instead. I respect Go's philosophy, but I feel like pragmatism must win in this case.


What are some alternatives?

When comparing Chronos and errcheck you can also consider the following projects:


GoLint - [mirror] This is a linter for Go source code. (deprecated)


gcvis - Visualise Go program GC trace data in real time

apicompat - apicompat checks recent changes to a Go project for backwards incompatible changes

Go Metalinter

goast-viewer - Golang AST visualizer

lint - Run linters from Go code -

goimports - [mirror] Go Tools

goreturns - A gofmt/goimports-like tool for Go programmers that fills in Go return statements with zero values to match the func return types


go-cleanarch - Clean architecture validator for go, like a The Dependency Rule and interaction between packages in your Go projects.