4 ms·

Nice article as someone familiar with sum types but not sum types in Java. I don't know if sum types alone are enough to get me to like Java, pervasive nullabi

Nice article as someone familiar with sum types but not sum types in Java. I don't know if sum types alone are enough to get me to like Java, pervasive nullability is still around and even rears its head multiple times in this article.

pharmakom 3y ago
It's also not expression orientated yet.
- kaba0 3y ago
  Fortunately switch has now an expression variant. But I would die for an if-else expression (very subjective, but I would prefer a more verbose if-else to ternaries), and especially a try-catch expression!
leapis 3y ago
Nullable is a huge issue in Java, but annotation-based nullability frameworks are both effective and pervasive in the ecosystem (and almost mandatory, IMO). I'm really excited about https://jspecify.dev/ https://jspecify.dev/, which is an effort by Google, Meta, Microsoft, etc to standardize annotations, starting with @Nullable.
- wayfinder 3y ago
  I hope they succeed. So many people have tried.
  - mrkeen 3y ago
    Not having nulls is easy. Persuading Java devs not to use nulls is hard.
- kaashif 3y ago
  This can never be as effective as changing the default reference type to be not nullable, which would break backwards compatibility, so you can never really relax. I know Kotlin is basically supposed to be that, it has a lot of other stuff though, and I haven't used it much.
  - martindevans 3y ago
    That's basically what c# has done. But it's implemented as a warning which can be upgraded to an error. I think it might even be an error by default in new projects now.
    - kaashif 3y ago
      Holy shit, how didn't I know they'd taken it this far? This is great! https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/nullable-references#nullable-contexts https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/nullable-ref... They actually fixed the billion dollar mistake...
      - 5e92cb50239222b 3y ago
        They didn't. A proper fix would require getting rid of null altogether in favor of ADTs or something similar. I work with C# daily and nulls can still slip through the cracks, although it's definitely better than @NotNull and friends. I haven't worked with Kotlin in a while, but IIRC their non-nullable references actually do include runtime checks, so you cannot simply assign null to a non-nullable and have it pass at runtime like you can (easily) do in C#.
  - foolfoolz 3y ago
    they won’t change the default reference type to non null. might take a few years but you can see their planned syntax here: https://openjdk.org/jeps/401 https://openjdk.org/jeps/401
- mrkeen 3y ago
  I was just writing about nullability annotations! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37534184 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37534184
- netheril96 3y ago
  Nullable annotations don’t work with well with generics, or at least those tools I use.
wscp-dev 3y ago
With valhalla, we will have explicit nullability as well, so that problem will also be handled.

pharmakom 3y ago

It's also not expression orientated yet.

kaba0 3y ago
Fortunately switch has now an expression variant. But I would die for an if-else expression (very subjective, but I would prefer a more verbose if-else to ternaries), and especially a try-catch expression!

leapis 3y ago

Nullable is a huge issue in Java, but annotation-based nullability frameworks are both effective and pervasive in the ecosystem (and almost mandatory, IMO). I'm really excited about https://jspecify.dev/ https://jspecify.dev/, which is an effort by Google, Meta, Microsoft, etc to standardize annotations, starting with @Nullable.

wayfinder 3y ago
I hope they succeed. So many people have tried.
- mrkeen 3y ago
  Not having nulls is easy. Persuading Java devs not to use nulls is hard.
kaashif 3y ago
This can never be as effective as changing the default reference type to be not nullable, which would break backwards compatibility, so you can never really relax. I know Kotlin is basically supposed to be that, it has a lot of other stuff though, and I haven't used it much.
- martindevans 3y ago
  That's basically what c# has done. But it's implemented as a warning which can be upgraded to an error. I think it might even be an error by default in new projects now.
  - kaashif 3y ago
    Holy shit, how didn't I know they'd taken it this far? This is great! https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/nullable-references#nullable-contexts https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/nullable-ref... They actually fixed the billion dollar mistake...
    - 5e92cb50239222b 3y ago
      They didn't. A proper fix would require getting rid of null altogether in favor of ADTs or something similar. I work with C# daily and nulls can still slip through the cracks, although it's definitely better than @NotNull and friends. I haven't worked with Kotlin in a while, but IIRC their non-nullable references actually do include runtime checks, so you cannot simply assign null to a non-nullable and have it pass at runtime like you can (easily) do in C#.
- foolfoolz 3y ago
  they won’t change the default reference type to non null. might take a few years but you can see their planned syntax here: https://openjdk.org/jeps/401 https://openjdk.org/jeps/401
mrkeen 3y ago
I was just writing about nullability annotations! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37534184 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37534184
netheril96 3y ago
Nullable annotations don’t work with well with generics, or at least those tools I use.

wscp-dev 3y ago

With valhalla, we will have explicit nullability as well, so that problem will also be handled.