On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 04:09:26 +0300, Bartosz Milewski <bartosz@relisoft.com> wrote:

> I just assume that any extension of the already complex D type system will be met with a lot of resistance. I remember the all-out wars about const and immutable (a.k.a invariant). Even those extensions are still half-assed: the construction of immutable objects and const polymorphism issues remain.
>
> My impression is that theoreticians and very advanced programmers love elaborate type systems. Nine-to-five programmers, which are in the majority, prefer simplicity even if the cost is reliability. Just look at the comments to my blog post.
>
> I know we have to do something about null references in D, but I'm still on the fence about how we should accomplish that.
>

So, let's ask the community: Would you like to see nullable types in D?

http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpview/539369-138652
(please, don't abuse by voting multiple time)

Explain your reasoning in newsgroups. Thank you.

Op Mon, 09 Feb 2009 02:25:55 +0100 schreef Denis Koroskin <2korden@gmail.com>:

> On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 04:09:26 +0300, Bartosz Milewski <bartosz@relisoft.com> wrote:
>
>> ...
>>
>> My impression is that theoreticians and very advanced programmers love elaborate type systems. Nine-to-five programmers, which are in the majority, prefer simplicity even if the cost is reliability. Just look at the comments to my blog post.
>>
>> I know we have to do something about null references in D, but I'm still on the fence about how we should accomplish that.
>>
>
> So, let's ask the community: Would you like to see nullable types in D?
>
> http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpview/539369-138652
> (please, don't abuse by voting multiple time)
>
> Explain your reasoning in newsgroups. Thank you.
>

I voted yes. There have been far too many NullPointerExceptions in various languages, for the 9-5 programmer to understand in 15 minutes what non-nullable types are :-)