On Saturday, 18 January 2014 at 00:12:16 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Yes, improving the language is in the cards. I have collected
enough hard evidence to convince myself that null references
are a real and important issue (previously I'd agreed with
Walter who is considering it not particularly remarkable).
Have they tried using a NotNull!T yet? I wrote one ages ago for a
phobos pull request that didn't really go anywhere, but I'm still
keeping my file updated with new ideas (most recently, the
if(auto nn = x.checkNull) {} thing):
http://arsdnet.net/dcode/notnull.d
I really think that is very close to meeting all the requirements
here, but tbh I don't use it much in the real world myself so I
could be missing a major flaw.
Of course, such library solutions don't change the default
nullability of references.
