Yoh Deadfall

> And again, with your proposal, people have to now do `range.LowerBound.Value` all the time, which makes the API less usable. That's what I don't like in my proposal. Okay,...

> BTW just in case it wasn't clear... At the moment I don't think we should do my nullability-based proposal - I don't think we should do anything (except possibly...

Do I correctly understand that you're not interested in taking a new design at all and that it won't happen?

@vonzshik, you're right, but mostly I was interested in the first point and other usability improvements. And the proposed implementation stores data exactly as PostgreSQL does, so write and read...

Of others will be involved too, am fine with it. Just to point out, not a single dev complained about the API, there were other participants. Me too thinks that...

My intention here to make it usable and construct in a fluent way without taking so much parameters and so. Even before contributing here I wasn't able to understand how...

Agreed on the last sentence, there's an additional member to be accessed. It was done according to C# guidelines saying that `implicit` operators must not throw. At the same time...

@khellang, your opinion is welcome here!

It's good that I had no time yesterday on the issue and that I spent a lot of time on Rust for two reasons: * Got some points of knowledge...

> I don't think the resulting type depends on data. It's while `GetFieldValue` is used. The same thing was with arrays @FransBouma reported to us. > I don't really understand...