On Monday, 26 February 2018 at 15:27:11 UTC, Meta wrote:
The idea is to treat `Option!T` as a regular input range so it can be used with all the regular range algorithms without special casing it. You're right in that the null/non-null dichotomy is equivalent to the notion of a range being empty or non-empty.
I kinda start to see the idea... Granted, nullable is in a way a range that can hold exactly one or exactly zero elements. Not a bad idea at all.
But shouldn't it store the value internally as a pointer, not as an array, to save a bit space? When empty, it would point to null.
