rust-lang / rust-lang/rust-clippy
Official stance on how to return errors
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
A-lint
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 13.5k
- Forks
- 2.2k
- Avg merge
- 2d 10h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 32
Description
What it does
return Err(ErrKind::Foo.into()) and Err(ErrKind::Foo)? are both accepted.
There shouldn't be two ways of doing the same thing and the latter is more succint.
Advantage
- Less code
- Unified way of doing things
Drawbacks
- Can be annoying.
- Unclear if we want to emit where there's no
.into()
Example
return Err(ErrKind::Foo.into())
Could be written as:
Err(ErrKind::Foo)?
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
The issue names no files, tests, or entry points. First clarify whether this should become a Clippy lint or an official style decision, then define the accepted behavior for return Err(ErrKind::Foo.into()) and Err(ErrKind::Foo)? before identifying the relevant implementation and tests.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100