If you don't think it's an important distinction then your real beef is that the developer can choose to panic in certain scenarios, which of course is silly when put in context.
>Except these aren't at all the same. With a reference, you have no good way of telling whether your reference IS nullable. As the article mentions, we have annotations to do just that. >Therefore it is trivial to a)…
That is the old bug tracker. An issue was submitted on the official tracker and immediately closed. See https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/issues/56 for explanation.
>Actually, (much to my disappointment as I'm just learning rust) you can just take an Option or Result and .unwrap() and the compiler won't complain at you unwrap() is a convenience method that still uses exhaustive…
If you don't think it's an important distinction then your real beef is that the developer can choose to panic in certain scenarios, which of course is silly when put in context.
>Except these aren't at all the same. With a reference, you have no good way of telling whether your reference IS nullable. As the article mentions, we have annotations to do just that. >Therefore it is trivial to a)…
That is the old bug tracker. An issue was submitted on the official tracker and immediately closed. See https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/issues/56 for explanation.
>Actually, (much to my disappointment as I'm just learning rust) you can just take an Option or Result and .unwrap() and the compiler won't complain at you unwrap() is a convenience method that still uses exhaustive…