name: m06-error-handling description: "CRITICAL: Use for error handling. Triggers: Result, Option, Error, ?, unwrap, expect, panic, anyhow, thiserror, when to panic vs return Result, custom error, error propagation, 错误处理, Result 用法, 什么时候用 panic" user-invocable: false

Error Handling

Layer 1: Language Mechanics

Core Question

Is this failure expected or a bug?

Before choosing error handling strategy:

Can this fail in normal operation?
Who should handle this failure?
What context does the caller need?

Error → Design Question

Pattern	Don't Just Say	Ask Instead
unwrap panics	"Use ?"	Is None/Err actually possible here?
Type mismatch on ?	"Use anyhow"	Are error types designed correctly?
Lost error context	"Add .context()"	What does the caller need to know?
Too many error variants	"Use Box"	Is error granularity right?

Thinking Prompt

Before handling an error:

What kind of failure is this?
- Expected → Result<T, E>
- Absence normal → Option
- Bug/invariant → panic!
- Unrecoverable → panic!
Who handles this?
- Caller → propagate with ?
- Current function → match/if-let
- User → friendly error message
- Programmer → panic with message
What context is needed?
- Type of error → thiserror variants
- Call chain → anyhow::Context
- Debug info → anyhow or tracing

Trace Up ↑

When error strategy is unclear:

"Should I return Result or Option?"
    ↑ Ask: Is absence/failure normal or exceptional?
    ↑ Check: m09-domain (what does domain say?)
    ↑ Check: domain-* (error handling requirements)

Situation	Trace To	Question
Too many unwraps	m09-domain	Is the data model right?
Error context design	m13-domain-error	What recovery is needed?
Library vs app errors	m11-ecosystem	Who are the consumers?

Trace Down ↓

From design to implementation:

"Expected failure, library code"
    ↓ Use: thiserror for typed errors

"Expected failure, application code"
    ↓ Use: anyhow for ergonomic errors

"Absence is normal (find, get, lookup)"
    ↓ Use: Option<T>

"Bug or invariant violation"
    ↓ Use: panic!, assert!, unreachable!

"Need to propagate with context"
    ↓ Use: .context("what was happening")

Quick Reference

Pattern	When	Example
`Result<T, E>`	Recoverable error	`fn read() -> Result<String, io::Error>`
`Option<T>`	Absence is normal	`fn find() -> Option<&Item>`
`?`	Propagate error	`let data = file.read()?;`
`unwrap()`	Dev/test only	`config.get("key").unwrap()`
`expect()`	Invariant holds	`env.get("HOME").expect("HOME set")`
`panic!`	Unrecoverable	`panic!("critical failure")`

Library vs Application

Context	Error Crate	Why
Library	`thiserror`	Typed errors for consumers
Application	`anyhow`	Ergonomic error handling
Mixed	Both	thiserror at boundaries, anyhow internally

Decision Flowchart

Is failure expected?
├─ Yes → Is absence the only "failure"?
│        ├─ Yes → Option<T>
│        └─ No → Result<T, E>
│                 ├─ Library → thiserror
│                 └─ Application → anyhow
└─ No → Is it a bug?
        ├─ Yes → panic!, assert!
        └─ No → Consider if really unrecoverable

Use ? → Need context?
├─ Yes → .context("message")
└─ No → Plain ?

Common Errors

Error	Cause	Fix
`unwrap()` panic	Unhandled None/Err	Use `?` or match
Type mismatch	Different error types	Use `anyhow` or `From`
Lost context	`?` without context	Add `.context()`
`cannot use ?`	Missing Result return	Return `Result<(), E>`

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern	Why Bad	Better
`.unwrap()` everywhere	Panics in production	`.expect("reason")` or `?`
Ignore errors silently	Bugs hidden	Handle or propagate
`panic!` for expected errors	Bad UX, no recovery	Result
Box everywhere	Lost type info	thiserror