rethrow() -> throw()

[adigitoleo]

Unless I'm missing something, there is no use of the zero-argument throw() at the moment. Also, ?rethrow discourages using rethrow(e) in favour of throw(e). This is a suggestion to delete/deprecate rethrow and use a zero-argument form of throw() for rethrowing the current error. The motivation is simplification, and to avoid immediately presenting new Julians with caveats (?rethrow). Personally I seem to forget about rethrow every time I return to Julia, because I'm thinking in terms of multiple dispatch and throw() seems more natural. Python's raise also behaves in a similar way: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html#index-27

[purna135]

Hi, I am new to open source and I want to fix this essue can you give me some suggestions on how to start.

[adigitoleo]

@pcm135 Best to wait on some more opinions for this one. This is not a bug but a feature request.

[JeffBezanson]

This is a reasonable idea, but I think there is a further distinction between throw and rethrow: throw creates a new nested exception, while rethrow continues as if the exception had not been caught. It's technically possible to have throw() = rethrow(), but it's arguably cleaner to give different names to those different behaviors.

[adigitoleo]

arguably cleaner to give different names to those different behaviors

Fair enough. Maybe its a docs issue, probably ?throw should point people to rethrow() in that case.

[DilumAluthge]

It seems reasonable to have the docstring for throw point to rethrow, and also vice versa.

[adigitoleo]

Check PR, rethrow already mentions throw so I haven't added it again.