Spec#, nullables and more

[Walter Bright]

Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
> 	I thought D was supposed to be a pragmatic language? All this means
> is that we need a compromise between what would be ideal (being able
> to represent arbitrary conditions and have them statically enforced
> at compile time) and what can be realistically achieved. Your
> argument seems to be: "since there are cases which we won't be able
> to handle, let's not do anything at all, not even the cases which we
> could handle".


The idea is to find a way to solve this in the general case, not the specific 
case of non-null pointers. Then we've got dynamite in our hands, rather than 
warmed over toast.