use native errors.Join for multi-errors on "docker ps", "docker node ls"

[thaJeztah]

- What I did

- How I did it

- How to verify it

- Human readable description for the release notes

- A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory but encouraged)

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 55.55556% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
cli/command/container/update.go	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
cli/command/node/ps.go	83.33%	1 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[Benehiko]

it is possible to use errors.Join directly on the error type instead of a slice.

varerrserrorerrs=errors.Join(errs, err)
errs=errors.Join(errs, err)

[thaJeztah]

Yeah, they're subtly different though; repeatedly calling errors.Join effectively is similar to errors.Wrap; the new error is nesting previous errors, whereas a slice approach makes them all "peers"; https://go.dev/play/p/42cXzTSkjoA

package main
import (
"errors""fmt"
)
funcmain() {
errs:= []error{
errors.New("one"),
errors.New("two"),
errors.New("three"),
}
varnestederrorfor_, err:=rangeerrs {
nested=errors.Join(nested, err)
}
flat:=errors.Join(errs...)
fmt.Printf("Flat : %#v\n", flat)
fmt.Printf("Nested: %#v\n", nested)
}

Output;

Flat : &errors.joinError{errs:[]error{(*errors.errorString)(0xc000012040), (*errors.errorString)(0xc000012050), (*errors.errorString)(0xc000012060)}}
Nested: &errors.joinError{errs:[]error{(*errors.joinError)(0xc00000e060), (*errors.errorString)(0xc000012060)}}

[Benehiko]

interesting, i thought it might've behaved the same

[thaJeztah]

Yeah, I think they chose a bad name for the function; I was confused as well when I was pointed at it! Join feels like "same level", not "wrap errors to be nested".

In many cases it doesn't make a big difference, e.g. errors.Is will recurse, so will still find nested errors (which sometimes is a bit of a pain / unwanted as well), but sometimes it may matter ("peer" errors vs "nested errors")