DIP 1017--Add Bottom Type--Community Review Round 1

[Dukc]

On Friday, 10 August 2018 at 12:42:37 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
>> meant is(typeof(*null) == typeof(assert(0)))
>
> How is that a good thing??? Also that is not specified in the 
> dip. I would expect that to fail because both will produce 
> error nodes in the AST, only assert(0) is considered special 
> under this DIP.

Granted, an example like that should be described so we know 
better what he means with the possible future uses.

The benefit would be that null can be a regular pointer constant 
(enum null = typeof(&assert(false)).init) instead of a symbol 
with special meaning. I'd think it makes compiler rules less 
complex.

Another advantage is that you could pass null as an argument for 
a function template which wants to know it's element type (but of 
course not instantiate it) like any other pointer.