Java has so many deficiencies in its design that so many frameworks are invented to cover its flaws.
Just give a real Optional type at a language level. It’s clearly possible in other JVM languages.
Just give a real Optional type at a language level. It’s clearly possible in other JVM languages.
Java the language has its flaws, but the frameworks make the situation worse.
> Just give a real Optional type at a language level. It’s clearly possible in other JVM languages.
It's not the presence of Optional that we need, it's the absence of nulls. And nulls are in all the libraries. And you also have to convince your fellow Java developers that null is bad.
What you mean by “at a language level” would break the byte code for jars compiled with older jdks.