On 19.07.2017 12:24, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Sunday, 16 July 2017 at 20:44:13 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Perhaps we go the inverse route and define the bottom type as
typeof(*null). Would that simplify matters? There is some good
consistency about it:
null: a pointer to anything. But can't be dereferenced.
*null: well, therefore... anything. But can't be created.
That sounds more like a top type, though, because as you said it can be
"anything". A bottom type can not be anything, but only nothing.
There is nothing that can be anything, but anything can be top.
Natural language has an unfortunate tendency to blur the distinction
between dual concepts as it gets more informal.
