this post was submitted on 31 May 2025
590 points (98.8% liked)

Trans Memes

1796 readers
28 users here now

A place to post memes relating to the transgender experience.

Rules

  1. Follow lemmy.blahaj.zone community guidelines.
  2. Posts must be trans related.
  3. No bigotry.
  4. Do not post or link to pornography.
  5. If a post is tagged with a specific gender identity, keep the conversation centered on that identity.
  6. Posts that assume the viewer’s gender and/or contain potentially triggering content must be spoilered and tagged at the beginning of the post title. Example content-warning tags that you can copy include the following:
  1. Mods can be arbitrary.

Recommendations

  1. Include other tags in posts for example:
  1. Include image description when possible.
  2. Link to source

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
BiNonBi@lemmy.blahaj.zone
0x2640@lemmy.blahaj.zone
590
private String gender; (lemmy.world)
submitted 6 days ago by andros_rex@lemmy.world to c/transmemes@lemmy.blahaj.zone
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 46 points 6 days ago (3 children)

That should be private string? Gender. Explicit nullables are your friends.

[–] Ziglin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

let gender: Option<string>;

I like rust.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 18 points 6 days ago

yeah don't even force people into identifying their gender as empty string since it's a social construct anyway

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 8 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Which language(s) have <type>? now? Is that a new Java thing? JS/TS thing? I've never seen it.

Edit: formatting

[–] Custard@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Kotlin has it as well

[–] hikaru755@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Syntax is a little different though, the above wouldn't complete

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

C#. Until semi-recently it was only used for value types (as reference types are supposed to be nullable by default) but these days you can enable explicit nullables, which means that you have to explicitly specify nullability even for reference types.

I like explicit nullables. It's not much more work to type those question marks and it adds a safeguard against null showing up where it shouldn't.

I specifically ~~inspired~~ insisted on it for this picture because the code on the sign uses capitalized names for something that isn't a class, which is a very C# thing to do.

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That sounds similar in purpose to Haskell's 'Maybe' or Rust's 'Option' enum, right?

I still think that the null type was a mistake that introduces unnecessary bugs. But I'm glad to see more languages are taking measures against it

[–] tuna@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 6 days ago

Someone can correct me if im wrong but I think nullable in C# still doesnt force you to do a null check before accessing properties or methods, however I believe it does give a type error when using a nullable type where non-nullable is expected, which is good. So it might not be 1-to-1 but it fulfills a similar purpose for sure.

Coming from a rust background I would have sure appreciated my workplace enabling the nullable feature on our main codebase from the start. I've run out of patience for null errors :(

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 3 points 6 days ago

Thanks for the info!

[–] mothersprotege@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

I'm a novice in these matters, but it's definitely a thing in C#.