Skip to main content

Home/ ProgrammingPages/ Group items matching "c" in title, tags, annotations or url

Group items matching
in title, tags, annotations or url

Sort By: Relevance | Date Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Navneet Kumar

Generics in c#, Java, and c++ - 1 views

www.artima.com/...genericsP.html

c# c++ generics java

shared by Navneet Kumar on 07 Aug 08 - Cached
  • And really all they're doing in their implementation is automatically inserting those type casts for you. So you get the syntactic sugar, or some of it at least, but you don't get any of the execution efficiency
  • because Java's generics implementation relies on erasure of the type parameter, when you get to runtime, you don't actually have a faithful representation of what you had at compile time. When you apply reflection to a generic List in Java, you can't tell what the List is a List of.
  • C# does the instantiation at runtime.
Navneet Kumar

Bruce Eckel's MindView, Inc: 3-10-04 Generics Aren't - 0 views

www.mindview.net/log-0050

article bruceeckel c++ generics java parameterized_type templating

shared by Navneet Kumar on 22 Aug 07 - Cached
  • Generics seem to only solve the problem of automatically casting in and out of containers.
  • So if we write generic code that actually takes a "type of anything," that type can only be an Object, and our generic code must only call Object methods on it.
  • generics have no advantage. In fact, it's confusing if you see them used, because you scratch your head and wonder "why does he need a generic here? What is the advantage?" Answer: none.
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • Java Generics use "erasure," which drops everything back to Object if you try to say "any type." So when I say <T>, it doesn't really mean "anything" like c++/ADA/Python etc. does, it means "Object."
  • So generics are really "autocasting."
  • That's the way of the Java world, and we are going to miss out on latent typing (it's actually possible to simulate latent typing using reflection, as I do once or twice in Thinking in Java, but it's messy and much less elegant).
  • Navneet Kumar on 22 Aug 07
     
    bruce Eckel article on java generics, and how it does  nothing more than  autocasting. Also templating or parameterized type in c++, Ruby, Python
Navneet Kumar

Ken Arnold's Blog: Generics considered Harmful - 0 views

weblogs.java.net/...generics_consid_1.html

discussion generics java

shared by Navneet Kumar on 22 Aug 07 - Cached
  • this: Enum is actually a generic class defined as Enum<T extends 
  • When used in public interfaces, generics are also invaluable to enforce correctness, prevent bugs and reduce testi
  • generics is reifying type relationships that are otherwise implic
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • The problem is that generics don't get on with arrays. The solution is obvious: ditch arrays. From a practical point of view, there's not a great deal of point in returning arrays from methods instead of collections of s
  • Note the circular reference in "Unique<T extends Unique>" It means that the implementing class needs to provide another unique class as the namespace for it's Id's. The really freaky thing is that it can provide itself. :) These two interfaces enable a way to describe uniquely identified objects with heirarchical namespaces in a typesafe manner. How much complex code did that save?
  • ype". You only need generics in strictly typed function dispatch languages like c++ and Java. You don't need them in message passing dynamically typed languages like Smalltalk and Objective c. To work around the first rule - "strict static typing doesn't really work all the time", we get hacks like templates and generics
  • call the Elvis/Einstein b
  • Navneet Kumar on 22 Aug 07
     
    discussion on java generics, too complex, dangerous or useful, type safety, when n how to use
1 - 4 of 4
Showing 20▼ items per page