Wording around null comparisons
Chapter 1: The changing face of C# development: P 13, final paragraph
Created: 7/29/2008
Last updated: 7/29/2008
Severity: Language improvement
When introducing nullable values, I say this in the book:
a product with an unknown price will be considered to be less expensive than $10, which is probably what we'd want.
It's not clear that this is because we use the greater-than operator to do the comparison with $10, and that greater than and less than comparisons with null values are always false. So, if instead of price > 10m
our comparison had been !(price <= 10m)
(a comparison which looks like it will do the same thing) we'd get the wrong answer.
This is fully explained on P125 when discussing nullable types in more depth.