C# interview

[Don]

Denis Koroskin wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 05:55:30 +0400, Michel Fortin 
>> That said, I'm not against nullable value-types. My opinion is that 
>> perhaps the language could be kept simpler by only allowing pointer 
>> and object references to be nullable, because that's where it matters 
>> the most.
>>
> 
> Yes, you rarely need use of them, and in most cases they are local 
> variables created on stack so the cost is minimal.
> That said, they are not crucial for the language, but it is better to 
> have them for consistency with reference types.

References are NOT values. Don't pretend they are the same.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."