4 ms·
I don't know what 'even typescript' is supposed to mean. Are you saying that typescript is the natural bar for comparison here? That doesn't seem correct, isn'
by burnished 2y ago
I don't know what 'even typescript' is supposed to mean. Are you saying that typescript is the natural bar for comparison here? That doesn't seem correct, isn't typescript a project that tries to correct javascript's lack of typing?
Since it isn't an error to have a nillable type, and it isn't an error to access a field, it makes sense that the compiler doesn't error when you do that thing. If you want a warning when doing something silly then you can setup a linter.
If your first thought is that is not very beginner friendly then I agree with you - I edited my original response. But otherwise there are solutions to these problems.
If that doesn't suit you and Go isn't sweet enough for you, well, fair. Its rather austere. I don't think it is a categorical error for the project (though there are features I would also like for asking).
- ilrwbwrkhv 2y agoMy point is nillable values by default is a strange choice and throws out 50 years of computing history. It has been clearly established that it leads to null pointer exceptions. The fact that a modern language lets you do it is a bit strange.
- burnished 2y agoOh I didn't really get that from what you had been saying. Sure, I'd agree it feels like a whoopsie, I dislike nil values because they are a common source of faults.