Oh yes, I had understood that "proofs by contradiction can easily be in error" but I suppose that's because people try the contradiction proof first, because it "should be easier"
And of course, constructive proofs are usually more complicated, in terms of proof structure as well as 'where to go and how to get there'
My comment was based on a more precise point, namely that #3 in the process below is very natural:
1. Assume the theorem is false.
2. Make some calculations based on that assumption.
3. Eventually, make an error.
4. Pursue that error to a contradiction.
5. Claim victory.
And of course, constructive proofs are usually more complicated, in terms of proof structure as well as 'where to go and how to get there'