← Back to context Comment by joe_mwangi 7 hours ago Since they plan to have null-restricted types, then I don't see any issue. 2 comments joe_mwangi Reply Dylan16807 5 hours ago > plan toWell wasn't that the argument above, that the stuff they added so far isn't proper at least in part because they didn't fix that problem yet? joe_mwangi 2 hours ago > yet But up the comment section, someone thinks they won't be there 'in the future'
Dylan16807 5 hours ago > plan toWell wasn't that the argument above, that the stuff they added so far isn't proper at least in part because they didn't fix that problem yet? joe_mwangi 2 hours ago > yet But up the comment section, someone thinks they won't be there 'in the future'
joe_mwangi 2 hours ago > yet But up the comment section, someone thinks they won't be there 'in the future'
> plan to
Well wasn't that the argument above, that the stuff they added so far isn't proper at least in part because they didn't fix that problem yet?
> yet But up the comment section, someone thinks they won't be there 'in the future'