IssueRaiser

I would agree with you, except there's no way to fit type erasure into that sentiment.

I would agree with you, except there's no way to fit type erasure into that sentiment. Type erasure is a complex solution to an easy problem, done purely out of laziness and a broken sense of what "backwards compatible" should mean. The moment you try to do anything "interesting" with generics, you realize the sham that they are and start passing around `Class<T>`, which is exactly what you would have done before generics anyway.

Posted by jdmichal on Jun 18, 2015, 8:58 PM

Tags

Related issues

Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.6,000 issues0 comments

reliability (Other)

I would agree with you, except there's no way to fit type erasure into that sentiment.

jdmichalJun 18, 2015, 8:58 PM

I would agree with you, except there's no way to fit type erasure into that sentiment. Type erasure is a complex solution to an easy problem, done purely out of laziness and a broken sense of what "backwards compatible" should mean. The moment you try to do anything "interesting" with generics, you realize the sham that they are and start passing around `Class<T>`, which is exactly what you would have done before generics anyway.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

Comment on this issue