Declined Proposal: A built-in Go error check function, “try”
This hits at something fundamental about Go, which is what I like the most about it...<p>It&#x27;s a language intended to have few primitives with an emphasis on code being transparent and errors being values, requiring you to think about what they might be at each point as you&#x27;re forced to carry them up the chain.<p>Do I particularly <i>like</i> managing errors that way? No, but I do think that it improves the transparency and quality of a lot of Go projects.<p>The same goes with the Go ecosystem and tools. You might not like how gofmt forces your code or the documentation conventions used by golint but the fact that we all use the same convention and documentation is awesome and it&#x27;s what allows things like godoc.org. I think the proverb is &quot;gofmt&#x27;s style is no one&#x27;s favorite, yet gofmt is everyone&#x27;s favorite&quot;.<p>And things like the lack of abstractions and generics are what create a community that&#x27;s less reliant on dependencies. &quot;A little copying is better than a little dependency&quot; and you can see it in stark contrast to something like the JS community with its require(&#x27;left-pad&#x27;) NPM ecosystem.<p>So, yeah, I like that they didn&#x27;t fragment the community around something as arbitrary as this. And I get that some people won&#x27;t like it, just as they don&#x27;t like the lack of generics, but there is strength in some of these approaches that isn&#x27;t immediately obvious.