It's interesting to see people complain about potential implicit end of function ergonomics features in @rustlang, ignoring that a lot of the modern language practice is based on similar things, e.g.:
* Deref
* ? with implicit From conversion
* Reborrow
* match ergonomics
Oh, so try_into() will be of type `TryIntoError` or something. It'd be nice if in our "foo" module we could turn that into `foo::Error::TryInto` or `foo::Error::BarFn::ConversionError`. The only good way to achieve this would be to wrap errors using (something like) .context().
-
-
The big big benefit of that is that it becomes super obvious which branch produced an error. And using `.causes()` you could trace back all contexts, creating a clear picture of why things failed. Been reading up on Failure, and really like the way it wraps errors in types :D
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
failure's Fail::context allows you to supply context to your result -- but `.try_into()?` can already give you a pretty specific error. Can you give an example where you'd need more context?