C# as a language had numerous and interesting features implemented in the last years. I always wished that Java was that fast in making improvements, instead of spending years for every decision.
It is a fantastic tool in many cases where a null is much clearer than something like -1 to denote a missing value.
However, I can see the issue with some developers using nullable types for everything. But any sufficiently powerful/flexible tool is always going to be misused by some.
(I have a the same opinion about goto and operator overloading; clearly the folks at Microsoft agree with me here.)
No More:
Check.IsNotNull(objRef, "stop being a muppet");I agree, allowing a nullable wrapper around a (already inherently nullable) reference type would be a horrible misfeature. What language was that?
The only exception is Java, where everything is basically frozen after release and cannot ever be changed anymore.
Most of the time, targeting a newer version in Scala is just a recompilation away, like on .NET. So if you are good with .NET, you should be good with Scala, too.