Sent from my iPad
> On 31 oct. 2014, at 18:22, Fritz Anderson <fri...@manoverboard.org> wrote: > >> On 31 Oct 2014, at 6:40 AM, Charles Jenkins <cejw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> My day job is programming in C# for Windows computers. I was really excited >> when Swift came out because it’s so similar to other languages I know well >> and use and admire. > > (Snip) > > An out-of-band value for “no result” has been a feature of programming > languages since SQL’s NULL at least; And of course, C#'s Nullable, which seems similar enough to Swift optionals (apart from only being necessary for value types) that I'm quite curious to know what makes optionals more objectionable. I also use C# in my day job and was happy to see Swift had some of its nicer features (nullables included) although I have to admit that part of the reason I liked C# in the first place was that it had some Objective-C-like features I liked. Is the problem just that when working with Objective-C frameworks, you have to use optionals more often than you usually would? Or is it that you have to explicitly state when reference types are Nullable, whereas in C# they always are? _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
