ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Abley <>
Subject Re: AW: a problem compiling a Java 5 project with generics
Date Wed, 18 Oct 2006 17:27:17 GMT
Chavdar Botev wrote:
>> Peter Reilly wrote:
>> The original code may be slightly incorrect (my understanding
>> of java generics is not high).
> Ha-ha. I think the original code cannot be slightly incorrect. It is
> either correct or incorrect. ;) It certainly possible that my
> understanding of Java generics is wrong. I come from a C++ templates
> background and although syntactically similar, Java generics and C++
> templates seem to be very different. C++ templates are just fancy
> macros. Java generics are types. Unfortunately, I think that these
> syntactic similarities can often lead to misconceptions and errors.
> The problem with the project I posted is the inconsistent behavior. If
> my code is incorrect, that's fine, I'll have to rework it. In this
> case, the compilation should always fail. If the code is correct, the
> compilation should always succeed.
> Anyway, I think I am going to post on the Sun Java problems to try to
> locate where the problem is. Is it in my possibly incorrect
> understanding of Java generics, is it in the java compiler, or is it
> in Ant which puts the destination directory in the classpath?
> As of the previous comments about the value in using Java generics, I
> think the biggest value is not saving some typing. In fact, with the
> lack of typedefs, this saving is rather dubious. I think the biggest
> advantage is that they allow the Java compiler to do a lot of type
> checks at compilation time. In previous versions of Java, you could
> add an Apple to a collection of Oranges and you will not know this
> until you try to retrieve the Apple and type-cast it to an Orange.
> Anything that avoids a runtime error by doing a compile-time check is
> good in my book.

Maybe. That's what my tests are for; I've done too much with dynamic 
languages not to rely on TDD. ;-)

>> Scot P. Floess wrote:
>> The problem here, I think, is that the inner class
>> has access to everything defined in the outer class (this includes the
>> declaration of the generic).
> Ha-ha. This is what I kind of trying to use. The inner classes in my
> case (and I have more than one per outer class) serve as different
> views on the data in the outer class. Each view contains only the
> functionality that certain other classes should care about. I don't
> want to lump all the interface methods into the outer class.
> Thanks,
> Chavdar
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message