Alright. If i use a secondary constructor i have to provide defaults for the non-nullable fields, which feels wrong to me. And the init block is just extra boilerplate, that i would rather not type. Would be cool if there was some way to explicitly call the setter from the primary constructor

Are you sure you have to provide defaults? Did you accidentally keep an empty primary constructor

()

?

Absolutely sure. Also i will be unable to use val, since it has to initialized from the primary constructor

Let me try that, I'm not convinced.

Even if I can, I will still have to type “this.email = email”, so it requires the same boilerplate as the init block (but wouldn’t assign and reassign)

Sure, you'll still nice a bit of boilerplate.

Right. Another odd thing is that IntelliJ suggests that i convert the secondary constructor to a primary, even though they apparently have different semantics. But thanks for your time @karelpeeters, I appreciate it 🙂

That's a bug then, I'd report it on YouTrack. Good luck!