dennis luehring Wrote: > Am 29.10.2010 09:26, schrieb Roman Ivanov: > > They would be a great help in debugging programs, for example. > > NullPointerException is probably the most common error I see in Java. > > 95% of all times it gets thrown in some weird context, which gives you > > no idea about what happened. The result is a long and tedious debugging > > session. > > 100% correct - but to have null-able types help to writer code faster in > the prototype phase, and not having them will also change the way > developers are "forced" to write code > > and there are million developers out there who likes/and use null-able > values for flow-control - if the null-able "feature" is removed without > something that keeps the style working, you will loose them, or much > more evil, they will try to code around the non-null-able-style getting > back to there well known null-able behavior, by using bools, ints, > strings whatever -> that will not help in library growth around D > > try comming up with an pattern that keeps both pro/cons...
I need null whole time. Null = empty array. Null = empty object. Null = 0 integer. Null = 0 floating point. Null = "" String with length 0. Null = void return in function. It so good many places. Not have null make me not know how to program! then I switch to C++!