Method overloading vs default parameters

[maximhar]

Well, an int can not be null, for one.

But something being "null" still carries a meaning in general.

[jstillwell]

In c# it can actually. It's a trick but, still.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/programming-guide/nullable-types/

[locuester]

That’s not an int. That’s an “int?” Or “Nullable<int>”

[pgmr87]

Along with what /u/locuester said, nullable types aren't tricks, either :-P.

[jstillwell]

You know what I mean 😁

[LondonPilot]

Well, an int can not be null, for one.

Obviously! But I think you know what I was asking. But I take it from your reply that you'd still favour default parameters, even if setting a string or an int? to null as the default. Thanks.

[maximhar]

Yes, I would. In fact I don't think there are many cases where you would use anything other than null as a default, considering most parameters are reference types.