Nullable with reference types

Meta via Digitalmars-d-learn digitalmars-d-learn at puremagic.com
Tue Jun 30 11:10:43 PDT 2015


On Tuesday, 30 June 2015 at 15:17:00 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I tend to think that it's incredibly stupid to use something 
> like Nullable for a type that's already Nullable.

Unfortunately, we're stuck with it as changing that would break 
code.

> It's just silly. If a type is already nullable, then just use 
> that and stop being adding extra overhead for no good reason.

I agree. There are several minuscule advantages you get from 
wrapping a nullable type with Nullable, but they're almost 
negligible.




More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn mailing list