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