On Wednesday, 20 November 2013 at 19:23:32 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 19:53:43 Meta wrote:
Yes. It is very important not to allow direct access to the
underlying value. This is important for ensuring that it is not
put in an invalid state. This is a mistake that was made with
std.typecons.Nullable, making it useless for anything other
than
giving a non-nullable type a null state (which, in fairness, is
probably all that it was originally intended for).
It's arguably pretty pointless to put a nullable type in
std.typecons.Nullable. If you want a nullable type to be null,
just set it to
null.
- Jonathan M Davis
See the discussion from the other thread for why it can be useful
to wrap a nullable reference in a option type (nullable is a
pseudo-option type).
