Notes on implementing concise calls to constructors with type parameters

Maurizio Cimadamore Maurizio.Cimadamore at Sun.COM
Thu May 14 04:28:36 PDT 2009

> Yes, assuming the "diamond" construct is only to be used on the 
> right-hand-side of an assignment.  But I think it's wrong to make 
> language constructs non-orthogonal.
It seems to me that the "diamond" construct has always had this 
restricted-ness right from the beginning. See the original draft:

Btw - allowing inference in method invocation context is rather complex 
- a slight variation of your example fails to compile with both 
approaches; given the following  method declaration:*

void f(List<String> xs) ...*

the following method call

*f(new ArrayList<>())*

won't type-check. I'm not saying that the algorithm doesn't exist, but 
it seems way too far from what the original draft looked like. The 
bottom-line is: if we just consider inference in assignment context (and 
I think we should - at least if we want to keep this change 'small'  ;-) 
), there's no substantial difference between my proposal and yours.


More information about the coin-dev mailing list