"Model 2" prototype status

Brian Goetz brian.goetz at oracle.com
Fri Aug 7 17:17:59 UTC 2015


> So in that case, considering the static T or Foo<T> members as belonging
> to a concrete specialization is actually intuitive, at least to me.

We've had this discussion several times before, and still no one is 
buying this argument.

Coming from C# (or C++), which have different models for parametric 
polymorphism, it might make sense.  (Even if Java, it might have been 
"intuitive" if we had heterogeneously-translated generics from day one, 
but we didn't.)  In Java, statics have always been shared across 
instantiations (and they predate instantiations).  Having them shared 
across some instantiations (Foo<String> and Foo<Integer>) but not others 
(Foo<Integer> and Foo<int>) would be silly and definitely not intuitive.

Changing the current behavior (making them not shared across any 
instantiations) is completely off the table.  (Do I even have to say 
this?)

I understand what you want to express, and I agree its valuable that it 
be expressible.  But the path you're trying to sell is not the way to 
get us there.


More information about the valhalla-dev mailing list