On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 19:08, G. P. B. <george.bany...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 19:05, Eugene Sidelnyk <zsidel...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Null value by itself was invented to indicate lack of data. >> But we can't just use it instead of objects, because of how it works. >> We need to create a boilerplate of NullObjects. >> Consider the abstract factory example: >> https://3v4l.org/9D9LU >> >> The problem is not with nullsafe operator. It is basically in null >> constant. To correctly work with absence of object, NullObjects is required >> (one for each abstraction). >> >> > I don't see why users should return null values more often. >> >> They should not return null values! But with nullsafe they will be prone >> to. >> >> > First of all please bottom post instead of top posting. > > Secondly, that's just your philosophy and the null safe operator was > introduced to > accommodate this way of thinking. > However, this does not mean it's better or should be the way it works, > especially now > that the null safe operator has already been implemented, and changed > established > semantics need a *good* reason. > > Regards, > > George P. Banyard > Just saw that you replied individually, please keep all discussion on list (i.e. reply all). Regards, George P. Banyard
