Null thread

Null is a mistake only if you're severely retarded

>>10
first of all, check'em.

What do you mean by that? A null type? Something like bottom or unit?

null is already a bottom type. the point is for it not to be one - so that the compiler will complain if you try to use it as a value

Functions that return pairs? How would that help?

it's not the best approach because it ends up being verbose, but think of it like go-style error handling applied to nulls: if a function doesn't return what it usually returns, it returns an error value indicating that the normal return didn't happen.

So, like Maybe in haskell?

yes. Maybe in haskal, std::optional<> in sepples, Optional<> in Java etc.