On Tuesday, 19 November 2013 at 19:31:41 UTC, bearophile wrote:
A Nullable in usually efficient enough (there is even an alternative Nullable that doesn't increase the data size), it makes typing stronger, and it should become more common in system languages (and indeed it's commonly used in Rust, where the pattern matching makes its usage nicer). [] is a bad indicator because perhaps ZZ could be empty, so you are mixing signals.
I don't want to argue this in details right now but I think that simply banning null references as valid arrays in program as a whole via contracts is better approach than adding extra level of indirection via Nullable ;)
