Re: [OT] Java generics

From	Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Subject	Re: [OT] Java generics
Date	2016-04-18 12:11 +0300
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<878u0bs2lz.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> (permalink)
References	<CAN8CLg=_5oBp5ehR_NgfjQcXuM5cWajAVdKT7BytKJ93r13L0Q@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.118.1460931049.6324.python-list@python.org> <dnjkd8FtsjnU1@mid.individual.net>

Show all headers | View raw

Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz>:

> It's understandable that Java didn't originally have a typedef,
> because all types had short enough names anyway. But generics changed
> that in a big way, and it baffles me that some form of typedef wasn't
> added soon afterwards.

Java's opposition to typedef seems to be something fundamental and
philosophical, although I don't exactly understand what.

What people do then is they define classes and interfaces as typedefs,
which is even worse.


Marko

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[OT] Java generics (was: Guido sees the light: PEP 8 updated) Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2016-04-18 08:02 +1000
  Re: [OT] Java generics Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-04-18 20:32 +1200
    Re: [OT] Java generics Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-18 12:11 +0300

csiph-web