The decision pretty early on was for there to be nulls… but you can't pass them around. We're considering alternatives, like having a Null type as a sibling of any, or something like that. Union types have to be built first, if you want the same efficiency as Java nulls. We'll get around to it after the compiler is significantly less painful to use.
> On Mar 3, 2015, at 5:42 PM, Robbert van Dalen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Java’s null appears to be an instance of the bottom type. Which is nonsense, > as Todd argues at Avail’s website. > But I’d rather interpret Java’s null to be Nothing (Avails nil?) as the > singleton inhabitant of Option[+A]. > >> On 03 Mar 2015, at 23:55, Robbert van Dalen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hmm, may be there are some languages that deal with nulls at compile time: >> >> Swift’s Option Chaining: >> https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Swift/Conceptual/Swift_Programming_Language/OptionalChaining.html >> >> Kotlin’s null safety: >> http://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/null-safety.html >> >> Ceylon’s optional types: >> http://ceylon-lang.org/documentation/1.0/spec/html/introduction.html#compiletimesafety >> >> Btw. Ceylon type system is pretty interesting because it has sub-typing and >> union/intersection types. >
