Great article, thanks. I do like the "nullable reference types" naming though. I think the implementation plays well with the existing "nullable value types" paradigm.
I'm oddly picky on names. I'm okay with the term when saying that string? is what's new, as that is a nullable ref type. But the reality is we've been living with nullable ref types since the betas.
Just my own neuroses. Thanks for the feedback!
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
We strive for transparency and don't collect excess data.