can anyone think of a more idiomatic way to do this? ```if (error != null) throw error```

# announcements

[Kevin Gorham]

can anyone think of a more idiomatic way to do this?

if (error != null) throw error

[Casey Brooks]

not much different, but you can do error?.let { throw it }

[jw]

It is already idiomatic. Anything else you do will be either trying to be clever or code golfing character count. Or both.

[Kevin Gorham]

Good point. I think it's just the mechanics of throw that make this feel more awkward than other, similar code. Parameters that are exceptions are often nullable. I almost wish that throw null did nothing or error?.throw worked.
I'm fine writing the lengthier version, I just had a suspicion that there might be some other stdlib approach out there that I didn't know about.

[Arkadii Ivanov]

You can always define your own extension function. But again, this is already ideomatic.

[Derek Peirce]

If throw null worked, then everywhere a throw e occured, I would have to double-check that e is non-null, or else it isn't a guaranteed throw and the remaining code in that block might still happen.

[jw]

throw null works in Java and in Java bytecode as an easy way to throw an NPE

[E.Kisaragi]

but harder to figure out why he wrote so