pickYourDestiny(img)

>>57813857
"null" will make america great again

>>57813857
NULL
WinAPI style

>>57813857
```nullptr```

>>57813857
(void*) 0

nil

nil

>>57814251
Worst thing that happened to programming after OOP

>>57813857
None and "None"

NULl

>>57813857
None

nullptr
NULL
None
null
nil
0
Things should be what they look like. Null is defined as "having or associated with the value zero". Nil is defined as "zero...". None is defined as "not any". Why not just use zero then?

I choose something equally useless: nada

if (arrPtr != nada) { KillYourself(); }

moot

>>57814351
You are misinformed. nil was defined in LISP 1.5, which was around in the 1950s. OOP came around after the 1970s, with SIMULA.

Therefore, nil happened before OOP.

Now assuming you mean OOP is in a list of bad things to happen to programming, and nil is in the last right after OOP: this was at the beginning of PL design and those people made plenty of ugly baby projects that grew up to be mutants. I think it is pretty cool. Realistically, most modern programming languages were derived from ALGOL, so nil is meh.

nullptr

>>57813857
>Having a type sensitive language

>>57814969
this

Null is the worst thing to happen to a type system

>>57813857
Wait, what is

'\0'

??

I prefer nil

I prefer NULL because it's a constant.

>>57814596
a NULL type is different from the integer 0. It is good to keep them separated. For example if you are doing statistics on an array and parts of the array do not have a number.