I should mention that it doesn't work for pointers-to-pointers. This is still an error:

const s = S {};
const p = &s;
f(&p);  // fn f(_: ?&const ?&const S) void {}

Is that a safe transformation to make?

edit: Poorly phrased question. Better question: are non-nullable pointers a compile-time thing only? No effect on the size of the object?

Oh, and another question: should this work?

const s = S {};
try f(&s);  // fn f(_: error!?&const S) !void {}

I ask because it doesn't work with error!&const S either. error!S does however.

are non-nullable pointers a compile-time thing only? No effect on the size of the object?

Correct. Nullable pointers are guaranteed to be pointer sized.

I think that the example with an error set should work too.

Related is #733. After this is done we might remove the ability to cast T to &const T.

@bnoordhuis,

Once again, thank you for a high quality, high impact pull request. Would you like to become one of the owners of the zig-lang organization and have commit access?

Correct. Nullable pointers are guaranteed to be pointer sized. I think that the example with an error set should work too.

Okay, I'll chip at it some more.

Would you like to become one of the owners of the zig-lang organization and have commit access?

I'd be honored!