On Sunday, May 19, 2013 09:08:53 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > Anyhow, this discussion should have finality. We could go on forever > arguing the usefulness or lack thereof of non-nullable references. They > didn't catch up in some languages and did in some. My personal opinion > is "nice to have, but not greatly compelling". > > It's reasonable to assume no major language changes will accommodate > non-null references, so the next best thing would be to focus on a > library solution. As Walter said, a library solution has the perk of > allowing other interesting restricted types.
Wow, this thread really expanded since I looked at it last night. Yeah, I thought that it was clear that NonNullable or NotNull or whatever we want to call it was going to go in std.typecons and that that was going to be our solution to non-nullable references. This is one of those discussions that I should probably just stay out of, since it never seems to go anywhere useful. We've already decided on a solution. We just haven't gotten it into the standard library yet. - Jonathan M Davis
