Maurizio.Cimadamore at Sun.COM
Thu Oct 29 08:37:08 PDT 2009
Neal Gafter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore
> <Maurizio.Cimadamore at sun.com <mailto:Maurizio.Cimadamore at sun.com>> wrote:
> Neal, the complex-full approach is essentially your approach plus
> some magic to make the following work:
> Foo<Object> = new Foo<>(1);
> That is, a complex approach that takes into account the expected
> return type in order not to infer a type which is too specific.
> Such an approach would be compatible with the currently
> implemented simple approach (in fact, ANY other approach that
> takes into consideration the expected return type would be
> compatible with the simple approach).
> Are you telling me that you're confident that such "magic" can be
> specified, and implemented, and retrofitted onto the implementation of
> generic method invocations and argument contexts, without any deep
> issues? If so, I'm satisfied.
I think such an approach does exist - on the other hand if it didn't, it
would mean that there is no way (other than the simple approach) to
support the use case I mentioned several times in this thread.
More information about the coin-dev