Depends on your requirements.

If the admin status needs to be checked in a database, but most actions don’t require authentication at all, it’s pointless to waste resources checking and it would be left null until the first action that needs the information checks it and fills it in as true or false.

So in a language with nullable types, are you against a boolean ever being nullable? Null means “empty, missing info”. Let’s say we have role variable with a enum type of possible roles. It could still reasonably be nullable, because in some scenarios you don’t know the role yet, like before log in.

In any use case where we need to store some boolean, it’s a common occurrence that we don’t have the data and it’s null. It would be overkill to use an enum with True, False, NoData for these cases, where there is already a language feature made just for that, nullable values.

I’ve never used TypeScript, just writing from experience in other languages.

This is quite reasonable, aside from the variable name which should be isAdmin. A user either is an admin, or isn’t. Unless we don’t know, then it’s null. You are correct this is bad if the point was to represent roles, but it’s not supposed to.

Did you even read my comment? I already addressed what you said, and already included the quote.

But I really like how in the text you copied, “Windows 10 is the last version of Windows”, a factual statement about the newest version of Windows at the time, was editorialized into “Windows 10 will be the last version of Windows”, a statement about the future that was never said.

No, they never did. Yes, it was all over the news, but they literally didn’t. Go be angry at media for making stuff up. You don’t have to believe me, go ahead and find that announcement yourself. You won’t because there was never such an announcement.

Notice how even the article you linked doesn’t give a full quote? It just quotes someone saying “last version” without any context of the sentence it was used in? I will give you the full quote where that comes form. Someone asked a Microsoft developer what they are currently working on, and the answer was:

”Right now we’re releasing Windows 10, and because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10.”

It is obvious from context “last version” meant “latest version” here. And that misreading of a quote, conveniently not included in most articles, is the only source for all these news. No announcement. No journalist actually asking Microsoft about it. Just a fleeting comment by one Microsoft employee that obviously meant something else, in an answer about something else, but why let that get in the way of a good story.

And this was an answer to an audience question in a "Tiles, Notifications, and Action Center” presentation by a single Microsoft developer, on a developer conference. The absolute last place to look for a ground-breaking announcement about Microsoft’s future.

The company said it had yet to decide on what to call the operating system beyond Windows 10.

And the exact same article you linked confirms Microsoft is still deciding on the name for the next Windows? Which would make no sense if there was no next Windows?

“There will be no Windows 11,” warned Steve Kleynhans, a research vice-president at analyst firm Gartner.

There will be no Windows 11, says some guy who doesn’t work at Microsoft.

And then a bunch of cherry picked quotes about continous updates being a good thing. Yep, continous updates, just like we got in Windows Vista, and that have nothing to do with there not being new Windows versions.

Modern journalism is useless. Someone made up a thing, everyone else copied it. And not a single media outlet actually asked Microsoft about it. No one. Or maybe they did, but the answer meant there is no news, so let’s ignore it.