Is V? what we need ?
brian.goetz at oracle.com
Wed May 1 14:50:53 UTC 2019
> I fully agree, it's like getting ride of Integer, it's a fantasy, but not having a lot of API taking a N? as parameter type make that fantasy actually possible for the libraries you care.
We can’t get rid of Integer, but maybe we can make it 10x less important. That would be winning.
> V? as box allow that too. As i said there are two use cases for V?, not yet reified generics is one, backward compat is the other.
UndefinedTermException: “box” is ambiguous
> Part of the appeal of the proposal is that if we cripple N? so remove the subtyping relation and this is debatable, i think also the capability to call fields/methods on it, the semantics is the same a classical box from the type system POV
Classic boxes have accidental identity. Are you really proposing that we take the accidental-identity problem from these eight types, and give them to all values? Yuck!
Please, let’s be more specific about what you mean by box.
More information about the valhalla-spec-experts