► 33% OFF on my Go + HTMX + Templ Course PRESALE bit.ly/3UFruxO ► Full Projects, Mini courses, Resume reviews, and Coaching thetotalcoder.com ► Join my Discord community for free education discord.com/invite/Ac7CWREe58 ► 60% OFF on my Golang course fulltimegodev.com Goose GitHub: github.com/pressly/goose Thanks for watching

This approach is absolutely appropriate because it implements the paradigm of error handling at the source 👍

The next vid should be: A Beautiful Way To Deal With LOGGING in Golang

This is such an elegant organization. I'm sorry, I'm stealing this :) Your Make() function translates beautifully to Echo's HTTPErrorHandler callback. Very, very useful video. Thank you so much for this Anthony

This is beautiful. The only thing i'd say you're missing is generating a request id per request so that if a bug report is filed either by a consumer or a user of the frontend, they can included that request id in their report and you can look up the log messages for their specific request(s).

You're the daddy of golang. Keep it GOing!! 💪💪💪💪💪

I love your content and this new layout of videos where you just pick one topic and just keep the video short and concise is really good 🎉❤

Even thought I'm not completely convinced with returning errors as a default, i see how this can be very clean, more so if you implement this useful error types.

This is pretty clean

The beauty of errors in golang is its open to different implementations. I always try to improve my handling and get new ideas. For now my take is the following. There are three type of errors I want to handle 1. User validation errors, or sql errors that are results of a query 2. Server errors that are expected (for example server is down) 3. Server errors that should not happen. For example Json marshal/unmarshal Which means my validation is wrong somewhere. The last 2 are internal server errors, which I want to bubble and wrap as they get to the handler, since it will create the path trace. I also might want to trigger some action (for example special log or email to the admin to handle it asap). The first one should have a fixed response for each error and will not wrap. So the error message from the origin of the error bubbles up intact. Of course there is a another issue to solve when the api is multilingual.

The Make() function is absolutely useful, but I wish you would name it differently.

Can you make an updated API series where you build a complete JSON api with the std library router with postgres and error handeling like this? That would be awesome

Great episode as usual, Just I have one concern what if you make the invalidJSON veridic func then u can throw away the InvalidJSONData and ur code will be very idiomatic

Great video, thanks for share! I have one concern about return a message string sometimes and others an object, seems a little confuse. Could you comment about, please?

Is there any reason why you're not using `errors.As()` to check if your error is an ApiError?

which theme in vs code do you use? i am searching this theme veeeery long

Hello! I've read in the docs of body for HTTP request that it's closed automatically by a server, so it's not necessary to call defer r.Body.Close() in any HTTP handler.

What VSCode ext for Rest Api calls are you using?

Is there a reason why you do not use the http.Error() function of net/http package? I use it like 'if err != nil {http.Error(w, responseErr.Message, responseErr.Status) return}'

GOat

This is the reason why I use Fiber instead of standard library or Gin.

What is this "TC" file or something for sending requests? I see it for the first time, I am always using Postman to do these, but sometimes running one request for quick test inside VSC could be handy and I don't want to run "curl" :P

How can I access this code?

your ob'ekt instead of object sounds like ... a music to my russian ears ))

What happens if i dont close r.Body?

Just curious how the request validation is done. Is it a custom implementation?

I do wonder why `defer r.Body.Close()` is after error check for JSON)) Won't it cause troubles?

strange, I am doing this without having the handler throw an error. I guess its all about preference.

Just commenting to comment. This feels really convenient but not very go like. This ads a lot of inderection and unnecessary layers when the same functions could just write directly to the response writer. Which would be much simpler and clearer and do away with two or three unnecessary layers of inderection. But this is pretty much the same discussion for the 10th time on if handlers should returns errors our write to the response.

So what I currently do with the net/http library is use panic in controllers and recover it in a central error handling middleware. I can pass my custom error interface which the middleware can use to send data. Any problems with this approach?

is there real people that make money from Golang outside of back end jobs

Again we discover the wheel aye :P? Just use a framework do your job and that's all. Time is money you are not special, make it worthy.