Reopening the debate about non-nullable-by-default: initialization of member fields

[bearophile via Digitalmars-d]

Jonathan M Davis:

> Idan Arye:
>> We are all sick and tired of this debate, but today I've seen a
>> question in Stack Exchange's Programmers board that raises a
>> point I don't recall being discussed here:

> Yeah, I brought this up before, and it's one of the reasons why 
> I'm against non-nullable by default.

I think that problem was raised plenty of times during the 
discussions about non-nullable. And I think this paper (and 
successive ones) solve enough the problems:
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/leino/papers/krml109.pdf

And aren't the ideas about cooked/uncooked (referred as raw in 
the paper) already partially present in D?

Bye,
bearophile