Swift 2.0 includes a new way of handling exceptions via the try?
keyword. This is a quick post to explain the basics, and why this is
cool.
In Swift 1.x, all we had for error handling were optionals and
NSError
. Which is why many people adopted Either
/ Result
types as they can be found in
other
programming
languages:
let success = .Success
With Swift 2 and the introduction of try / catch
exception handling.
Internally, this doesn't use expensive stack unwinding, as other (say,
Objective-C or Java) do it, but instead seems to pretty much return
something akin to Either
or Result
. Only the syntax hides this from
the user in order to make it simpler to use1.
Swift 2 b5 and earlier
However, once you start using the new do / try / catch
more, what
happens from time to time is that you start nesting code into messy
branches because do
is (was) incompatible with the other major way of
handling potentially unknown states: optionals. Here's a particular
ugly piece of code. Observe how we're nesting if let
with let
with
do
with let
2.
if let uid = loggedInUser
One reason why this is difficult to simplify is that the do
forces a
break in any multi guard
or multi let
3.
Swift 2 b6
With beta 6, we get a new keyword, try?
which performs a throwing
operation and returns optional None
in case of failure and optional
Some
in case of success. Quoting straight from the
changelog:
A new keyword 'try?' has been added to Swift. 'try?' attempts to perform an operation that may throw. If the operation succeeds, the result is wrapped in an optional; if it fails (I.e. if an error is thrown), the result is 'nil' and the error is discarded. 'try?' is particularly useful when used in conjunction with "if let" and "guard".
This makes it possible to retrieve the value of a potential throwing operation as an optional. If we apply this to our code above, we can simplify it quite a bit:
if let uid = loggedInUser,
username = try? getUserName,
data = imagePostForUserName,
success = try? postImage
where success == true
This is, of course a bit of a contrived example, engineered to explain
try?
. But still, that's definitely less code. We're, of course,
loosing a lot of possibly valuable error information that would
otherwise be available in the catch
.
Which to choose?
try?
can help you write terser code at the expense of loosing
insights. Using try?
only returns an optional without further
information on the particular cause of the error / exception. The
benefit, of course, is beautiful composability with a lot of the
other Swift syntax, like map
, flatmap
, switch
, guard
, if let
,
for case
, and others.
The non-optional try
works great for distinct task where you're not
dependant on earlier or later possible optional results.
The aforementioned Result
type, on the other hand offers both; either
the requested value, or a possible error. You can just continue using
Result
, which also has support for wrapping throws and much more,
however keep in mind that this is not the direction Swift seems to
intend to go 4. Otherwise, we'd have a full blown Result or Either
type in Swift 2.
I'm really happy about the introduction of try?
as it will make many
snippets, particularly when interacting with the Cocoa API, easier to
solve.
Much like the lifting into / out of monads in Swift optionals is
hidden via the ?
syntax
There're ways to improve this code without try?
, of course, but
it makes for a nice example
Another is, of course, that I'm using raw NSRegularExpression here, instead of a simplifying library
Also, you'll always need to add additional dependencies to your project