Style: unwrap_or_else vs ok_or_else

[afetisov]

Here is a minor stylistic question: which of the following would you prefer, calling unwrap_or_else:

fn foo() -> Result<Bar, E> {
    let x: Option<Bar> = bar();
    let y = x.unwrap_or_else(|| return Err(ErrOther::new(..).into()) );
    /* use y */
}

or ok_or_else and unwrapping using the ? operator:

fn foo() -> Result<Bar, E> {
    let x: Option<Bar> = bar();
    let y = x.ok_or_else(|| ErrOther::new(..))?;
    /* use y */
}

Written as such, the first option is more boilerplaty and could also require a conversion between error types. Syntactically, I'm really interested in the more pretty version using anyhow macros:

fn foo() -> anyhow::Result<Bar> {
    let x: Option<Bar> = bar();
    let y = x.unwrap_or_else(|| bail!(..));
    /* use y */
}

// VS

fn foo() -> anyhow::Result<Bar> {
    let x: Option<Bar> = bar();
    let y = x.ok_or_else(|| anyhow!(..))?;
    /* use y */
}

Not that it matters much, but I wonder whether you would prefer one version over the other if you had to read really many unwraps.

[Cerber-Ursi]

The first one is probably more confusing, since it might first look like the bail! returns from the outer function, not from the closure.

[SkiFire13]

The first version won't actually compile because it will always return from the closure with the wrong type.

[alice]

The unwrap_or_else method is for handling None by using a default value. The ok_or_else is for turning None into an error. Thus, if you want to turn None into an error, use ok_or_else.

[steffahn]

Eventually, we might also get the alternatives

let Some(y) = x else { return Err(ErrOther::new(..).into()) };

and

let Some(y) = x else { Err(ErrOther::new(..))? };

Rust Playground

[steffahn]

For anyhow, there’s also the [with_]context methods, so e.g.

let y = x.with_context(|| …)?;

[afetisov]

Woops, indeed it does. Guess that closes the question. I got so used to panic in unwrap_or_else that I forgot closures can't return from enclosing functions.