You're Doing Error-Handling Wrong!
You’re Doing Error-Handling Wrong: A Case for Predictable and Standardized Responses
Introduction: An Opinionated Stance
Error handling in JavaScript is a topic that evokes strong opinions, and I’m here to share mine: the traditional try-catch approach is clunky, inconvenient, and outdated. At Garmingo, where we built Garmingo Status — a SaaS solution for uptime and infrastructure monitoring—we’ve shifted away from try-catch blocks. Instead, we embraced a TypeScript-based approach that provides predictable, standardized responses for asynchronous operations.
This article shares why we believe this paradigm is a game-changer for developer productivity and how it helped simplify our codebase. While it’s an opinionated take, I hope it inspires you to rethink how you handle errors in your own projects.
The Problem with try-catch
Let’s face it: error handling in JavaScript can get messy. Traditional try-catch blocks come with a host of challenges:
- Verbosity: Wrapping every asynchronous function call in a try-catch adds unnecessary boilerplate. It clutters your code and detracts from readability.
- Inconsistent Error Objects: JavaScript error objects can vary wildly in structure and content. Without standardization, handling these errors often feels like playing a guessing game.
- Nested Logic Hell: When dealing with multiple operations that can fail, nested try-catch blocks turn your code into an unreadable mess.
Here’s a simple example highlighting these issues:
try { const user = await fetchUser(); try { const account = await fetchAccount(user.id); console.log(account); } catch (accountError) { console.error('Error fetching account:', accountError); } } catch (userError) { console.error('Error fetching user:', userError); }
The result? Code that’s harder to read, debug, and maintain.
Enter the TypeScript Typed Response Paradigm
At Garmingo Status, we ditched try-catch in favor of a standardized response structure for all asynchronous operations. Here’s how it works:
The Structure
Every async function returns a Promise with a predefined union type:
Promise< | { success: false; error: string } | { success: true; result: T } >;
This approach ensures that:
- If the operation fails, the result is always { success: false, error: string }.
- If it succeeds, it’s { success: true, result: T }.
- If success is true there is a result object and no error object and vice versa. You cannot even use the result on failed responses.
Here’s the same example from above, rewritten with this pattern:
const userResponse = await fetchUser(); if (!userResponse.success) { console.error('Error fetching user:', userResponse.error); return; } const accountResponse = await fetchAccount(userResponse.result.id); if (!accountResponse.success) { console.error('Error fetching account:', accountResponse.error); return; } console.log(accountResponse.result);
As you can see it does not introduce any nesting for the main logic of your app. It just adds these small checks for error handling, but the main flow remains uninterrupted and can continue like there was no need for error handling in the first place.
The Advantages of Predictable and Standardized Error Handling
1. Predictability
The biggest benefit is knowing exactly what to expect. Whether the operation succeeds or fails, the structure is consistent. This eliminates the ambiguity that often comes with error objects.
2. Ease of Use
Gone are the days of deeply nested try-catch blocks. With the typed approach, you can handle errors inline without breaking the flow of your code.
3. Improved Readability
The structured approach makes your code cleaner and easier to follow. Each operation clearly defines what happens in success and failure scenarios.
4. Enhanced Type Safety
TypeScript’s static analysis ensures you never forget to handle errors. If you accidentally omit a check for success, the TypeScript compiler will flag it.
A Balanced Perspective
No approach is without its drawbacks. The typed response paradigm requires you to explicitly check the success status for every operation, even if you’re confident it will succeed. This adds minor overhead compared to the traditional approach, where you might simply avoid error handling altogether (albeit at your own risk).
However, this “drawback” is also one of its strengths: it forces you to think critically about potential failures, resulting in more robust code.
How We Use It at Garmingo Status
At Garmingo, this approach has transformed how we build asynchronous utilities and libraries. Every API call and database query adheres to this standardized response structure, ensuring consistency across our codebase.
In fact, EVERY single async function that is reused trough-out the project and could fail uses this approach.
The result? A smoother (and much faster) development experience and fewer late-night debugging sessions.
For example, a fetch function could look like this:
try { const user = await fetchUser(); try { const account = await fetchAccount(user.id); console.log(account); } catch (accountError) { console.error('Error fetching account:', accountError); } } catch (userError) { console.error('Error fetching user:', userError); }
This predictability has been a game-changer for our team, allowing us to focus on building features rather than untangling error-handling logic.
Conclusion
Traditional try-catch blocks have their place, but for modern JavaScript development — especially in TypeScript-heavy codebases — they’re often more trouble than they’re worth. By adopting a typed response paradigm, you gain predictability, readability, and peace of mind.
At Garmingo, we’ve seen firsthand how this approach simplifies development and enhances our ability to deliver a polished product like Garmingo Status. While it might not be for everyone, it’s an approach I strongly believe more developers should consider.
So, are you ready to rethink error handling? Let me know your thoughts!
The above is the detailed content of You're Doing Error-Handling Wrong!. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!

Hot AI Tools

Undresser.AI Undress
AI-powered app for creating realistic nude photos

AI Clothes Remover
Online AI tool for removing clothes from photos.

Undress AI Tool
Undress images for free

Clothoff.io
AI clothes remover

Video Face Swap
Swap faces in any video effortlessly with our completely free AI face swap tool!

Hot Article

Hot Tools

Notepad++7.3.1
Easy-to-use and free code editor

SublimeText3 Chinese version
Chinese version, very easy to use

Zend Studio 13.0.1
Powerful PHP integrated development environment

Dreamweaver CS6
Visual web development tools

SublimeText3 Mac version
God-level code editing software (SublimeText3)

Hot Topics











Python is more suitable for beginners, with a smooth learning curve and concise syntax; JavaScript is suitable for front-end development, with a steep learning curve and flexible syntax. 1. Python syntax is intuitive and suitable for data science and back-end development. 2. JavaScript is flexible and widely used in front-end and server-side programming.

The shift from C/C to JavaScript requires adapting to dynamic typing, garbage collection and asynchronous programming. 1) C/C is a statically typed language that requires manual memory management, while JavaScript is dynamically typed and garbage collection is automatically processed. 2) C/C needs to be compiled into machine code, while JavaScript is an interpreted language. 3) JavaScript introduces concepts such as closures, prototype chains and Promise, which enhances flexibility and asynchronous programming capabilities.

The main uses of JavaScript in web development include client interaction, form verification and asynchronous communication. 1) Dynamic content update and user interaction through DOM operations; 2) Client verification is carried out before the user submits data to improve the user experience; 3) Refreshless communication with the server is achieved through AJAX technology.

JavaScript's application in the real world includes front-end and back-end development. 1) Display front-end applications by building a TODO list application, involving DOM operations and event processing. 2) Build RESTfulAPI through Node.js and Express to demonstrate back-end applications.

Understanding how JavaScript engine works internally is important to developers because it helps write more efficient code and understand performance bottlenecks and optimization strategies. 1) The engine's workflow includes three stages: parsing, compiling and execution; 2) During the execution process, the engine will perform dynamic optimization, such as inline cache and hidden classes; 3) Best practices include avoiding global variables, optimizing loops, using const and lets, and avoiding excessive use of closures.

Python and JavaScript have their own advantages and disadvantages in terms of community, libraries and resources. 1) The Python community is friendly and suitable for beginners, but the front-end development resources are not as rich as JavaScript. 2) Python is powerful in data science and machine learning libraries, while JavaScript is better in front-end development libraries and frameworks. 3) Both have rich learning resources, but Python is suitable for starting with official documents, while JavaScript is better with MDNWebDocs. The choice should be based on project needs and personal interests.

Both Python and JavaScript's choices in development environments are important. 1) Python's development environment includes PyCharm, JupyterNotebook and Anaconda, which are suitable for data science and rapid prototyping. 2) The development environment of JavaScript includes Node.js, VSCode and Webpack, which are suitable for front-end and back-end development. Choosing the right tools according to project needs can improve development efficiency and project success rate.

C and C play a vital role in the JavaScript engine, mainly used to implement interpreters and JIT compilers. 1) C is used to parse JavaScript source code and generate an abstract syntax tree. 2) C is responsible for generating and executing bytecode. 3) C implements the JIT compiler, optimizes and compiles hot-spot code at runtime, and significantly improves the execution efficiency of JavaScript.
