rustic_result VS exhaustive

Self promotion moment:

If you enjoy the Result/Either type and API in Rust, I made this project just for this: https://github.com/linkdd/rustic_result

I also made https://github.com/linkdd/rustic_maybe/tree/main for an Option/Maybe type.

NB: Those are not types, but I'm waiting for set theoretic types to update those libs :)

It's missing the Erlang/Elixir pattern of returning a tuple `{:ok, T}` or `{:error, E}`, where we can then use pattern matching, or `with` expressions, etc...

To be fair, it is very similar to a `Result` type, which is why I made this library a while ago: https://github.com/linkdd/rustic_result

I intend to add a pipeline operator similar to Elixir, to be used with an std::result module which will provide functions to ease writing such complex code. I may take inspiration on an Elixir library I wrote a while ago: https://github.com/linkdd/rustic_result

A while ago, I made this library https://github.com/linkdd/rustic_result

I also made a library for working with `{:ok, value}` and `{:error, reason}` in Elixir: https://github.com/linkdd/rustic_result

Thanks to the pipeline operator and pattern matching, it makes pretty easy to read pipelines. It does not completely replace the with statement (that was not the point) but it simplified a lot of code.

This is an analyzer that will catch this: https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive

I believe it's in golangci-lint.

I agree linters in general are quite useful for Go though. The default suite from golangci-lint is quite good. I would also recommend enabling exhaustive if you're working with a codebase that uses "enums" (full disclosure, I contributed a bit to that project).

there’s a linter for exhaustive matching: https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive

I tried to find that linter and found this: exhaustive

And in Go you'd use a linter, like this one.

this is AST go vet analyzer that performs just that: https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive (too bad it can not do struct based enums..)

>> the main thing missing from Go is ADT's. After using these in Rust and Swift, a programming language doesn't really feel complete without them

What are the differences between an ADT (plus pattern matching i’d reckon?) in Rust/Swift vs the equiv in Go (tagged interfaces + switch statement)?

One has exhaustive matching at compile time, the other has a default clause (non exhaustive matching), although there’s an important nub here with respect to developer experience; it would be idiomatic in Go to use static analysis tooling (e.g. Rob Pike is on record saying that various checks - inc this one - don’t belong in the compiler and should live in go vet). I’ve been playing with Go in a side project and using golint-ci which invokes https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive - net result, in both go and rust, i get a red line of text annotated at the switch in vscode if i miss a case.

Taking a step back, there isn’t a problem you can solve with one that you can’t solve with the other, or is there?

To take a step further back, why incomplete?

Use a linter.

For an exhaustive linter, were you referring to this? It looks pretty nice. If it's possible to check this with static analysis, is it something that could be in the compiler itself in the future?

https://github.com/nishanths/exhaustive

here, have fun. You’re gonna write some tests, make new types to satisfy interfaces for testing, and then wind up with branches for your test paths in your live code, but go for it, I guess. You know everything! I am but a simple blubbite, too dim, too dim to get it.