Is the other-kind-of-null really necessary in Nullable and Variant?

[Idan Arye]

On Monday, 29 April 2013 at 20:00:32 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
>
> The init value of `Nullable!(Node!string)` is an object with 
> two member fields - `value` of type `string` and `next` of type 
> `Nullable!(Node!string)`. The default constructor modifies 
> neither, so they will both remain with their initial values. 
> The init value of `string` is an empty string. What is the init 
> value of `Nullable!(Node!string)`? To find the answer, return 
> to the beginning of this paragraph and read it again.

I made a mistake here - `Nullable!(Node!string)` is a struct with 
a boolean member `_isNull` and a `Node!string` member named 
`_value` which is an object as described in this paragraph. 
Still, the point remains - even if `_isNull` is true, `_value` 
still need to refer to a `Node!string` object.