null and type safety

[Walter Bright]

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:31 PM, Walter Bright
> <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>> Don't you think that eliminating something that's
>>> always a bug at compile time is a worthwhile investment?
>> Not always. There's a commensurate increase in complexity that may not make
>> it worth while.
> 
> Have you looked at Delight at all?  I wouldn't call the impact of
> nullable types on D "commensurate."  It's probably far less than
> const, invariant, pure, and escape analysis.

Sorry, I have not looked at Delight.


>> My focus is on eliminating bugs that cannot be reliably detected even at run
>> time. This will be a big win for D.
> 
> Can you expand upon this a bit?  What exactly are some bugs that can't
> be reliably detected at runtime other than memory corruption?

Memory corruption is a big one. Another are sequential consistency bugs, 
then there's function hijacking.