Is there any other idiomatic way to do this? ```r...

# announcements

[Joan Colmenero]

Is there any other idiomatic way to do this?

return when {
        pojo.dog != null -> {
            mapDog(this, pojo = pojo.dog!!)
        }
        <http://pojo.cat|pojo.cat> != null -> {
            mapCat(this, pojo = <http://pojo.cat|pojo.cat>!!)
        }
        else -> {
            mapDefault(this)
        }
    }

I have to add the !! because otherwise is saying

Smart cast is impossible because pojo.cat is an API class that is on a different module

[darkmoon_uk]

return
    pojo.dog?.let { mapDog(this,it) } ?:
    <http://pojo.cat?.let|pojo.cat?.let> { mapCat(this,it) } ?: 
    mapDefault(this)

[Joan Colmenero]

🤔

[darkmoon_uk]

I don't know why @Milan Hruban laughed; that's a perfectly concise and idiomatic answer (in case that was a source of confusion, @Joan Colmenero).

[Michael de Kaste]

a return when can indeed be perfectly translated to what Chris Hatton made. Kudos

[Milan Hruban]

@darkmoon_uk I laughed because I found that code very unreadable. Your code actually behaves differently than original snippet that Skizo posted. (in case that mapDog or mapCat return nullable values)

[darkmoon_uk]

If they are nullable returns that is true yes.

[darkmoon_uk]

Should have checked that - but assuming they are not, I think it reads ok.

[Joan Colmenero]

What I wanted to avoid is to use the !! there

[darkmoon_uk]

The compiler has already shared an opinion on that one 🙂

[Michael de Kaste]

you should define two local vals just above your return called pojoDog and pojoCat getting their vals from the pojo.

Then by using when on those, you shouldn't get the smartcast problem 🙂

[Michael de Kaste]

val pojoDog = pojo.dog

[Joan Colmenero]

Nice, let me try that

[Kroppeb]

I'm on my phone, so I can't check, but could this work?

pojo.dog?.let { return mapDog(this,it) }
    <http://pojo.cat?.let|pojo.cat?.let> { return mapCat(this,it) }
    return mapDefault(this)