Lints, Condate and bugs

[dennis luehring]

Am 29.10.2010 11:07, schrieb Denis Koroskin:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 11:58:56 +0400, dennis luehring<dl.soluz at gmx.net>
> wrote:
>
>>  Am 29.10.2010 09:26, schrieb Roman Ivanov:
>>>  They would be a great help in debugging programs, for example.
>>>  NullPointerException is probably the most common error I see in Java.
>>>  95% of all times it gets thrown in some weird context, which gives you
>>>  no idea about what happened. The result is a long and tedious debugging
>>>  session.
>>
>>  100% correct - but to have null-able types help to writer code faster in
>>  the prototype phase, and not having them will also change the way
>>  developers are "forced" to write code
>>
>>  and there are million developers out there who likes/and use null-able
>>  values for flow-control - if the null-able "feature" is removed without
>>  something that keeps the style working, you will loose them, or much
>>  more evil, they will try to code around the non-null-able-style getting
>>  back to there well known null-able behavior, by using bools, ints,
>>  strings whatever ->  that will not help in library growth around D
>>
>>  try comming up with an pattern that keeps both pro/cons...
>
> No one is talking about removing nullable references but rather adding
> non-nullable types and making them default. You could still achieve old
> behavior if it is needed (most proposed proposed syntax):
>
> Foo? foo = stuff.find(predicate);
> if (foo is null) {
>       // not found
> }

 > No one is talking about removing nullable references
sorry

 > most proposed proposed syntax
like it works in C# - but better because of "...and making them default." :)

sound very similar to the long talked about "make parameters const per 
default" proposal - which is also still not there :(