Notes on implementing concise calls to constructors with type parameters
neal at gafter.com
Thu May 14 09:32:23 PDT 2009
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:43 AM, Howard Lovatt <howard.lovatt at iee.org>wrote:
> Hopefully this is sufficiently detailed to enable you to comment.
This proposal is completely non-orthogonal and ignores the relationship
between the type parameters of the types on the right-hand-side (typically a
class) and the left-hand side (typically an interface). *Assuming *there is
a one-to-one relationship is bad design, even though it is most frequently
the case; the compiler knows the relationships between the types and should
use it. The proposal change the meaning of existing code (with respect to
raw types). It isn't clear how to make this proposal orthogonal to be used
elsewhere than a variable declaration. I suspect specifying this approach
would result in a more complex specification than either the approach I've
been advocating or the approach Maurizio has been implementing.
More information about the coin-dev