Null references (oh no, not again!)

[bearophile]

Walter Bright:
> It is not hiding the symptom, it is recognizing the reality that you 
> cannot write perfect software, so to require perfect software *and* 
> depend on it being perfect is a recipe for inevitable disaster.

This discussion is getting a bit silly. You argue no system is perfect, bug exists, and you have to put ways to save the situation when a trouble has occurred. What almost everyone else is saying is that you are right, but if there are simple ways to avoid a whole class of bugs, then it may be positive to consider trying such ways out.
In Boeing they write redundant code and use redundant CPUs and all you want, but they also use very rigorous ways to test things before they can fail. You have to attack bugs from every side and then be prepared to fail. And still, sometimes it doesn't suffice.

Bye,
bearophile