[ARROW-15359] [R] Discussion: should we use {rlang} for condition handling?

• Type: Improvement
• Status: Open
• Priority: Major
• Resolution: Unresolved
• Component/s: R
• External issue URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/30844
• Assignee: Unassigned
• Reporter: Dragoș Moldovan-Grünfeld
• Created: 18/Jan/22 14:27
• Updated: 11/Jan/23 11:36

Description

Currently we have a mixture of base::stop() and rlang::abort() in the codebase. Should we make a deliberate choice to use one or the other?
If we decided to switch to rlang, we could:

• change the codebase as we go along, switching from base functions (stop(), warning(), message() to their rlang equivalents abort(), warn(), inform()
• make an addendum to STYLE.md on condition handling

We could cover additional aspects of condition handling such as the wording of messages - for example, by using key words such as must or should.

Please discuss direction and why.

Note: the arrow R package already depends on rlang so any outcome will not result in additional dependencies.

Update: given paleolimbot's suggestion of the abort(glue)) pattern I think we should include in scope adding a dependency on and using glue. 

Issue Links

• is related to: ARROW-13370 [R] More special handling for known errors in arrow_eval