I am not fun of this API .
I my opinion it doesn't help much , but a way more verbose and confusing in reading.

@rdiachenko , what is your opinion or thoughts on this?

and confusing in reading.

why confusing? It tells what happens, not like before hiding the exception surprise/bug.

Don’t like it either, but it still seems to be the de facto convention, since IntelliJ IDEA and other tools suggest it as well.

Asuming the idea is to promote a clear API, as get throwing an exception is a bit of a surprise—it’s not obvious and relies on prior knowledge.

That’s not great software design, since we want to avoid surprises and instead aim for code that is clear and intentional.

It's not black and white. I usually consider its usage case by case. From the exception standpoint there is no difference:

Exception in thread "main" java.util.NoSuchElementException: No value present
	at java.base/java.util.Optional.orElseThrow(Optional.java:377)

vs

Exception in thread "main" java.util.NoSuchElementException: No value present
	at java.base/java.util.Optional.get(Optional.java:143)

If no additional context to provide, I go with .get() since its less verbose, otherwise .orElseThrow(() -> new SomeException("more context")) is more helpful.

By the way, I don't like neither approach. Usually you want to handle it in a more proper way like opt.ifPresent(value -> {....}), and similar methods. Relying on .get()/orElseThrow throwing exception should be a rare case as to me.

Thanks a lot.

@Pankraz76 , please disable this recipe with link to this discussion. In far future, next generation of maintainers might have different opinion. For now disabled.

Caused by: org.codehaus.plexus.compiler.CompilerException: error: invalid flag: -XepOpt:Refaster:NamePattern=^(?!OptionalRules\$OptionalOrElseThrow).*

applied from template:

• https://error-prone.picnic.tech/refasterrules/OptionalRules/#ororelsethrow

ok, future engineers will use blame to get to reason of exclusion and will find our conversation in PR

yes but its not working currently, need to add link once its stable.

can not make this work.