You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the early versions the scala-utils and spark-utils were Try[T] centric, meaning that everything that could fail returned a Try[T]. At some point, observing how some developers were using it, I decided that it might be easier to throw exceptions, even though my functional blood was boiling a little.
QuestionShould we go for a more functional, no side effects approach or should we keep throwing exceptions?
In a sense we are also logging, so we have few pure functions, so this question is actually not as easy as it seems.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Probably a local type, maybe isomorphic to Try[T] that expresses better the application return types should be a good choice. However, it all boils down to the most difficult part of software engineering, naming things :)
In the early versions the
scala-utils
andspark-utils
wereTry[T]
centric, meaning that everything that could fail returned aTry[T]
. At some point, observing how some developers were using it, I decided that it might be easier to throw exceptions, even though my functional blood was boiling a little.Question Should we go for a more functional, no side effects approach or should we keep throwing exceptions?
In a sense we are also logging, so we have few pure functions, so this question is actually not as easy as it seems.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: