To clear things up, Issues are related to handling using type erasure, not class generating approach.
вс, 21 апр. 2024 г. в 18:45, ІП-24 Олександр Ротань < rotan.olexa...@gmail.com>: > To clear thing up, Issues are related to handling using type erasure, not > class generating approach. > > вс, 21 апр. 2024 г. в 16:48, ІП-24 Олександр Ротань < > rotan.olexa...@gmail.com>: > >> I am not really familiar with goals and milestones of Valhalla project, >> but what I meant by simplification is that there would not be any more need >> to convert to promotove streams explicitly as Stream<primitive> would be a >> thing. If that's what Valhalla is working on, then this would be just >> great. Performance concerns regarding wrappers are also valid , but here >> I am talking about implementation complexity. >> >> If going little off topic, compiling many classes to achieve generic >> reification in fact looks odd, but it in fact provides best developer >> experience, Converting primitive arrays to collections is one of the >> examples of major problems issues with it, along with some methods of >> Arrays class (like sort, if I am not mistaken), just don't work with >> primitives.Approach that is used in C#, while has its downsides, provides >> much better user experience. However, what I am looking into right now is >> some hybrid form of generic handling, where generic maybe be reified on >> demand of developer (or implicitly if primitive is used). I am working on >> some prototypes at the moment >> >> вс, 21 апр. 2024 г. в 16:31, - <liangchenb...@gmail.com>: >> >>> On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 5:49 AM ІП-24 Олександр Ротань < >>> rotan.olexa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I have heard your proposal. Your approach indeed for sure has its >>>> advantages. >>>> >>>> One thing I don't like referring to is Valhalla. It's not even a >>>> preview and no one really knows when it will be, relying on it when >>>> designing API now would be strange to say the least. >>>> >>> Valhalla's value classes are actually quite ready; the compatibility and >>> the type system are quite fleshed out in the recent iterations, and the >>> prototypes are already functional. >>> >>>> >>>> One possible thing that could dramatically simplify implementation of >>>> my approach is introduction of generic reification, which would allow >>>> primitives as type params. I am currently studying the working of javac and >>>> possible implementation of this is one of the topics in my research. >>>> However, let's stick to what we have in jdk right now from now on. >>>> >>> Generic reification is part of project Valhalla too, in that it allows >>> wrapper classes in generics to have the same performance as the primitives >>> with generic specialization. Compiling many classes to achieve generic >>> reification is an alternative, but I don't think it's feasible. >>> >>>> >>>> I would like to hear opinions of other people regarding the design of >>>> such API, especially David and Remi, since, as I understand, that's not the >>>> first time they witness a discussion like this, so maybe they have >>>> something to tell here. >>>> >>> Unfortunately you will have to wait. Most JDK engineers are employees >>> who work on weekdays; only a few are enthusiasts. I think we may get more >>> discussion traffic on Monday. >>> >>
