Anonymous user
Talk:Null object: Difference between revisions
→Recent change: only a few solutions are wrong.
(→solutions that need review: new section) |
(→Recent change: only a few solutions are wrong.) |
||
Line 27:
::: Please stop changing task names and descriptions; we want to avoid accidentally making implementations of tasks wrong. Well, unless you're prepared to go through all the implementations and ''fix'' anything invalidated yourself. (Not all languages have a type system that admits nulls — i.e., a bottom to the pointer/reference type system — but where that's the case, there's typically other mechanisms for saying the broader statement of “there's nothing here”.) –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 09:30, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
:::: as has been said above, the title was wrong, the solutions are right. i went over them, and below is a listing of the issues i found. i'd appreciate if someone could verify those findings.--[[User:EMBee|eMBee]] 13:54, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
== solutions that need review ==
| |||