Neither is very good, as you're doing nothing to handle errors.
One requires .catch() in several places, the other a try { ... } catch (...) { ... } block or several.
Overall the await syntax is much easier to read and follow the logic, but if you have to put a try..catch around every one it quickly becomes a mess too.
It allows me to pipe/sidechain my errors where they truly belong, instead of breaking up my happy path logic with inline implementation of the catch block OR lambda.
If I need to abort the current function, the handler will just rethrow.
Neither is very good, as you're doing nothing to handle errors.
One requires
.catch()in several places, the other atry { ... } catch (...) { ... }block or several.Overall the
awaitsyntax is much easier to read and follow the logic, but if you have to put atry..catcharound every one it quickly becomes a mess too.I often do the following:
It allows me to pipe/sidechain my errors where they truly belong, instead of breaking up my happy path logic with inline implementation of the catch block OR lambda.
If I need to abort the current function, the handler will just rethrow.
Yeah, I agree. As with everything, you should choose carefully 😄