This issue is now fixed on GitHub master for jOOQ 3.5.0 and will be merged to 3.2.6, 3.3.3, 3.4.1: https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/3347
Thanks again for reporting this, Lukas 2014-06-24 17:59 GMT+02:00 Lukas Eder <[email protected]>: > Hello, > > Indeed, I can reproduce this issue with jOOQ 3.3.2. We changed the > relevant API in jOOQ 3.4.0 to acommodate wildcards for the Collection<?> > argument to the in() method. This is mostly because people want to support > both: > > - Collection<T> > - Collection<? extends Field<T>> > > The issue can be seen here: > https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/2973 > > The issue you've reported only appears when T binds to Object, which is > the only possible bound of T that introduces this ambiguity. This probably > hasn't surfaced so far, as most users use jOOQ's code generator for the > increased type safety. > > But it should also be fixed, in case someone manages to sneak a collection > argument into the in(T...) method. I have registered #3347 for this: > https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/3347 > > In the mean time, the only workaround I see is upgrading to jOOQ 3.4.0. > > Hope this helps, > Lukas > > > > 2014-06-24 17:37 GMT+02:00 Eric Wadsworth <[email protected]>: > > I'm using version 3.3.2, and my Java version is 1.7.0_51. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "jOOQ User Group" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
