I hadn’t thought about the fact that RUST_BACKTRACE controls panic backtraces. If you click through the link I provided to my original comments, you’ll see that we’re in complete agreement: my whole argument is about the division between types of errors.
@brson helped clarify this idea:
In short, I think backtraces are probably always valuable during development, but, in theory, backtraces for propagated failure codes that are explicitly included in function signatures should never be useful in production. In fact, since the compiler issues a warning when a Result error is not checked, it should be nearly trivial to statically ensure that error-chain’s backtraces won’t ever be needed.
Sorry to be unclear–I see how my quote out of context could give that impression. Hopefully my thoughts above should help clarify.