On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Josh Langsfeld <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, it does seem ill-posed in general. Still, it would nice if I could do > this for at least some subtypes that use the same type parameter pattern, > even if the behavior was undefined when it doesn't use the same pattern. > > Is there any method of dynamically computing a new type by changing one of > the parameters of a type known only at runtime? > > On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 1:04:14 PM UTC-5, Lutfullah Tomak wrote: >> >> For AbstractArray, a caveat is the actual type may have more parameters >> and cannot be sure about parameters' order.
You can always get the parameters (.parameters field) and construct a new type.
