Comments on: Evolving the Java language: generics were hard to implement

By: Amit Gupta

Amit Gupta — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 06:54:23 +0000

I imagin myself in the image you inserted at the last of this post, after self reading about generics

By: Beyond Java – “No Fluff, Just Stuff” Java Generics Quote | cstropz.net

Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:33:07 +0000

[...] Although I simpatize mostly with all these visions I just cannot have being narrow minded and I present you a link to an interesting Generics post. [...]

By: Gmail

Gmail — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:46:57 +0000

Google Says. Generics.

By: Java Collections Cheatsheet | Coder-friendly

Java Collections Cheatsheet | Coder-friendly — Tue, 12 May 2009 21:22:51 +0000

[...] Collections Cheatsheet Hello, As I said in my previous post, I currently read this great book (not expensive and few hours to read it): Java Generics and [...]

By: coder-friendly

coder-friendly — Sun, 10 May 2009 18:30:58 +0000

Hello Sakuraba,
I don’t know if generics can be fixed with using reifiable types. Maybe, the cost to change it would be too high and that’s it. I don’t think that the current solution is as bad as Bob says. Maybe, there’s no many problems where generics are so useful (I think collections cover the majority but I may be wrong).
I hope Oracle will invest massively in Java, but I don’t know whether they want to postpone the release of JDK7. But, they can be ambitious with the JDK8 .
Thank you for your comment.
Coderfriendly

By: Sakuraba

Sakuraba — Sun, 10 May 2009 09:40:28 +0000

So why dont we fix it then? Could the Oracle aqcuisition postpone the release of JDK 7 long enough to provide enough time to fix this?

By: bob

bob — Sun, 10 May 2009 01:24:47 +0000

The implementation of Java generics assures that noone will use them for anything but collections cast reducing. Its a bogus implemenation and the “complexity” argument is an apology.