Thanks! On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 1:24 PM G. P. B. <george.bany...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello, > > I don't really see the point of it as you self said this wouldn't add a > runtime check, so in what is it different to a comment? > More so reusing ! for this will, in my opinion, just lead to confusion as > people will think it negates the function, this is what > I would expect it to do at first glance. > Also comparing it to the nullable question mark is quite bizarre I find, > why not choose the ampersand for references instead? > At least it would cover the same "scope", as types have nothing to do with > how a function behaves. > > Best regards > > George P. Banyard >
