On Tuesday, 30 June 2015 at 11:50:19 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 June 2015 at 00:02:38 UTC, Meta wrote:
It's a design mistake in Nullable. I would suggest that either
never use Nullable with a type that already has a null value,
or use the "overload" of Nullable that takes a null value, and
set it to null. Example:
Class Test {}
alias NullableTest = Nullable!(Test, null);
Can we not specialize the other overload for references,
pointers, and maybe slices?
Not now, as that would break code relying on this behaviour. I've
created a replacement for Nullable that does this, though, and it
works quite well.
