What is wrong with NULL

I'm still not entirely convinced that NULL is a problem. But how NULL (and pointer types in general) work in C leads to much, much greater problems.

Though, I think uninitialized variables or memory might be just as bad.

One of the problem's Maybe still has is in the deeper question of "why are you expecting None to be here?". Don't get me wrong, there are valid cases for this, and Maybe is certainly preferable to null across the board, but I think the movement to Maybe in the greater programming space will in many cases practically result in trading one set of explicit errors (crashes) for (a more subtle?) set of errors (behavioral). In particular, this style of programming will become frequent (from Swift documentation):

   if let roomCount = john.residence?.numberOfRooms {
      println("John's residence has \(roomCount) room(s).")
   } else {
      println("Unable to retrieve the number of rooms.")
   }

Or from this blog post's own example:

   option.ifPresent(x -> System.out.println(x));

In other words, I think the core problem still hasn't been attacked and we may end up in the same situation we were in with exceptions originally: programmers will just throw up their hands and wrap everything in a Maybe/Optional and/or just maybe-protect until the compiler stops bugging them. At the end of the day, if you ? all your values then you end up with something equivalent to having everything be nullable and correctly null-checking them.

Obj-C had a form of this with nil calling of methods silently doing nothing (so you end up with methods that "conveniently" don't happen, and don't crash! when the receiver is nil). However, despite having lots of legitimate uses (don't bother checking your delegate exists), it can still very silently sneak in to other parts of the code.

As a mathematician I still think making "-1 % 7 == 6 % 7" evaluate to false is worse.

Came here to say this. In fact, I think every language that they give 5 stars to has some form of "foreign pointer", "raw pointer", "unsafe pointer" or the like that is nullable, for FFI and other low level tasks.

I think that anything which has no null in normal, idiomatic code, outside of "unsafe", "ffi", or similar subsets, should get 5 stars. The distinction is really about whether you need to worry about any possible value, or any possible reference, being null, which you do in languages like C or Java where all references are nullable.

Giving Java and Rust the same 4 star rating because they both have some form of null and some form of Maybe/Option is a bit misleading. In Rust, Option is what you use in any normal code, and so you don't need to check for Null everywhere. In Java, it's the other way around; nullable references have existed since the beginning and are not segregated in any particular way, while Optional is a recent addition.

Likewise, I think that in Scala and Swift, null is only present for compatibility purposes, and idiomatic code does not use them. I'm not sure about F#. Clojure does use nil idiomatically, and also has '(), which may even count as "multiple NULLs" according to this rubric, though I guess that in Clojure '() is just treated as an empty list, rather than a null value like it is in other Lisps.

It's not a huge hole and not such a big deal. Just don't design APIs to use null. I've done it, and I can tell, you, it works! (But to be fair, I haven't worked on database-backed software in half a decade.) When mistakes do occur they're the trivial kind where you get a stack trace and can work it out.

It's wrong to call null pointers a billion dollar mistake, too -- if we didn't have null (and in the absence of generics that permit Option, as things were long ago), programmers would end up using in-band sentinel values instead. That would be a much worse mistake.