.NET and the nullable configuration
-
Does anyone actually use .NET 7 with
enable? I find this option makes life such a PITA that I always go into the .csproj file and disable it. The warnings are non-stop:Non-nullable property 'foo' must contain a non-null value when exiting constructor. Consider declaring the property as nullable
Converting null literal or possible null value to non-nullable type.
Dereference of a possibly null reference.
Possible null reference assignment.
Nullable value type may be null.
And that's just a partial list, I believe. And that last one, "Nullable value type may be null" is the most amusing one. Seriously, if you have the "Nullable" option enabled, do you actually fix all those warning?
Latest Articles:
SVG Grids: Squares, Triangles, Hexagons with scrolling, sprites and simple animation examples
An SVG Analog ClockAgree these warnings are pretty annoying in a project that didn't start out using nullable ref types correctly from the start. I have a large project in this situation, and fixing all these warnings is pretty daunting, requiring significant rework and refactoring. But I've come to see the value of using nullable ref types, so I've adopted it in smaller projects, and have been using it going forward. It's just not feasible to retrofit in all cases.
-
Does anyone actually use .NET 7 with
enable? I find this option makes life such a PITA that I always go into the .csproj file and disable it. The warnings are non-stop:Non-nullable property 'foo' must contain a non-null value when exiting constructor. Consider declaring the property as nullable
Converting null literal or possible null value to non-nullable type.
Dereference of a possibly null reference.
Possible null reference assignment.
Nullable value type may be null.
And that's just a partial list, I believe. And that last one, "Nullable value type may be null" is the most amusing one. Seriously, if you have the "Nullable" option enabled, do you actually fix all those warning?
Latest Articles:
SVG Grids: Squares, Triangles, Hexagons with scrolling, sprites and simple animation examples
An SVG Analog ClockYes, I use it, and I like it very much. Removed all possible NRE, and it's perfect to make sure juniors do not introduce tons of bugs. Sometimes a IF xx != null is enough, some other times we need "!", I hope the compiler could become smarter like Typescript is.
-
Does anyone actually use .NET 7 with
enable? I find this option makes life such a PITA that I always go into the .csproj file and disable it. The warnings are non-stop:Non-nullable property 'foo' must contain a non-null value when exiting constructor. Consider declaring the property as nullable
Converting null literal or possible null value to non-nullable type.
Dereference of a possibly null reference.
Possible null reference assignment.
Nullable value type may be null.
And that's just a partial list, I believe. And that last one, "Nullable value type may be null" is the most amusing one. Seriously, if you have the "Nullable" option enabled, do you actually fix all those warning?
Latest Articles:
SVG Grids: Squares, Triangles, Hexagons with scrolling, sprites and simple animation examples
An SVG Analog ClockThis entire push to eliminate Null is misguided. The reason is that in the real world sometimes you really have no information, which is what Null represents. Look at numeric data types, zero is not the same as NULL. Zero is a value but NULL represents no value. This is a fundamental semantic difference.
-
No one is suggesting you should not use null. The nullable check makes it explicit where you intend to use it - just as it already is for value types.
-
Yes, I use it, and I like it very much. Removed all possible NRE, and it's perfect to make sure juniors do not introduce tons of bugs. Sometimes a IF xx != null is enough, some other times we need "!", I hope the compiler could become smarter like Typescript is.
-
This entire push to eliminate Null is misguided. The reason is that in the real world sometimes you really have no information, which is what Null represents. Look at numeric data types, zero is not the same as NULL. Zero is a value but NULL represents no value. This is a fundamental semantic difference.
Generally the idea is thus... Someone misused it - thus it must be a problem. Then they come up with an idiom that could fix it, that single problem, while introducing other potential problems (like using magic values for no value) and then proclaim that the world is a wonderful place. Thus hoping that a technology fix can absolve them of relying on process (non-technology) solutions which have been proven (studies) to reduce problems.
-
lmoelleb wrote:
makes it explicit where you intend to use it
Your assumption is that I do not understand what it does. You are incorrect in that assumption.
-
Does anyone actually use .NET 7 with
enable? I find this option makes life such a PITA that I always go into the .csproj file and disable it. The warnings are non-stop:Non-nullable property 'foo' must contain a non-null value when exiting constructor. Consider declaring the property as nullable
Converting null literal or possible null value to non-nullable type.
Dereference of a possibly null reference.
Possible null reference assignment.
Nullable value type may be null.
And that's just a partial list, I believe. And that last one, "Nullable value type may be null" is the most amusing one. Seriously, if you have the "Nullable" option enabled, do you actually fix all those warning?
Latest Articles:
SVG Grids: Squares, Triangles, Hexagons with scrolling, sprites and simple animation examples
An SVG Analog ClockNot using .Net 7 yet, but using this in .Net 4.8, .Net Core 31, 5, and 6. Yeah, the warnings can be annoying, but the benefit can be significant too. Especially with junior devs who aren't used to null checking everywhere/don't have the experience to spot all the potential problems... but it's good for us oldies too, everybody misses stuff sometimes. The first warning in that list is the one that annoys me most. There are several potential work arounds depending on the specifics, but I often feel none are good :(
-
You and others are convincing me that I should just bite the bullet and fix the code. ;)
Latest Articles:
A Lightweight Thread Safe In-Memory Keyed Generic Cache Collection Service A Dynamic Where Implementation for Entity FrameworkI suppose it's a bit like `const`. You can't just sprinkle a few around the place, you have to go all-in.
Paul Sanders. If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter - Blaise Pascal. Some of my best work is in the undo buffer.
-
Does anyone actually use .NET 7 with
enable? I find this option makes life such a PITA that I always go into the .csproj file and disable it. The warnings are non-stop:Non-nullable property 'foo' must contain a non-null value when exiting constructor. Consider declaring the property as nullable
Converting null literal or possible null value to non-nullable type.
Dereference of a possibly null reference.
Possible null reference assignment.
Nullable value type may be null.
And that's just a partial list, I believe. And that last one, "Nullable value type may be null" is the most amusing one. Seriously, if you have the "Nullable" option enabled, do you actually fix all those warning?
Latest Articles:
SVG Grids: Squares, Triangles, Hexagons with scrolling, sprites and simple animation examples
An SVG Analog Clock -
This entire push to eliminate Null is misguided. The reason is that in the real world sometimes you really have no information, which is what Null represents. Look at numeric data types, zero is not the same as NULL. Zero is a value but NULL represents no value. This is a fundamental semantic difference.
I fully agree with everything you wrote, however, nullable checking is not necessarily about eliminating the use of null per se. It's about telling things that can legitimately be null (then it reminds you to check) apart from things which should never be null (then it reminds you to not put a null in there).