On Wednesday, 22 November 2017 at 01:48:55 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
In the case of null, you _can_ prove it if you have
non-nullable types.
True (well...you can at least 'assert' it anyway).
But if the intention is to 'assist the compiler towards knowing
the truth/correctness about your statement', then this can be
easily done without introducing a new nullable reference type -
i.e.
if(object != null)
use it;
Either way, checks are made.
So I still don't see the point of adding a new nullable reference
type to a language, unless one is asserting that it is ok to not
already be checking for null (which seems to be the case for a
large number of C# programmers - hence the proposal).
