Re: Converting Sets
- From: Arne Vajhøj <arne@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 20:49:06 -0500
On 2/2/2012 8:34 PM, Daniel Pitts wrote:
On 2/2/12 4:29 PM, Roedy Green wrote:Have we gone down that road too far now that Java can never be fixedThe point of generics is to add compile-time type safety. Runtime
with run-time generics info without starting over with some completely
different notation? Then serialisation could work, containers could be
allocated with the precise array type. You would not have so much
under-the-hood casting.
"generics" is a contradiction to that.
That was the way it was decided to do it for Java.
But it did have to be that way.
And runtime check can certainly add to type safety!
Arne
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Converting Sets
- From: Daniel Pitts
- Re: Converting Sets
- References:
- Converting Sets
- From: Roedy Green
- Re: Converting Sets
- From: Mayeul
- Re: Converting Sets
- From: Roedy Green
- Re: Converting Sets
- From: Mayeul
- Re: Converting Sets
- From: Roedy Green
- Re: Converting Sets
- From: Daniel Pitts
- Converting Sets
- Prev by Date: Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication
- Next by Date: How do I scp extremely large files
- Previous by thread: Re: Converting Sets
- Next by thread: Re: Converting Sets
- Index(es):