If they can log it, then they can show it in the message.
In theory, I’m inclined to agree with you. But error handling in your code is not at all straightforward. Just successfully catching an error so the program can exit gracefully can be difficult. Classifying different error conditions and displaying an appropriate message is even worse.
Basically, the logs exist for exactly this purpose. Just how it works.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 13 hours ago
ReptilianCleric@lemmy.zip 11 hours ago
How often do you read log files…?
Like, windows specifically stopped including the stack trace in the blue screen of death because of how rarely that proved to be necessary. And most log files are about as easy to parse, so…
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 11 hours ago
Doesn’t matter. There is zero excuse for bad error messages.
anewfox@lemmy.zip 12 hours ago
it is wild for someone to say this immediately after saying “actually they can’t display the error because it’s too hard” and somehow not realize in the middle of typing how ridiculous it is trying to square those two claims.
ReptilianCleric@lemmy.zip 11 hours ago
Yes, and will outputting the log directly to screen help to make the error any less confiding?
And writing code that includes robust error catching and handling is simple, then?
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 10 hours ago
No one asks to output the naked log line. There are a few more information that could be presented in a more readable and useful manner in a message box. Error messages are meant to be helpful, not to annoy without knowing what happened.
Even if you are right and the log contains the answer, why not trying to make more helpful Error messages? Does it hurt you?
ReptilianCleric@lemmy.zip 10 hours ago
I have nothing against helpful error messages, please understand; just pointing out this issue is not a trivial matter. It’s not like somebody is doing this just to intentionally annoy you, after all.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯