Eran Tromer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Hardly! In Java's new generics you declare what the template argument
> must extend/implement.
> In C++'s templates the template code just references members and hope
> for the best; if the best doesn't happen, you get incomprehensible
> compile-time error messages all over the place. Baah.

I won't enter a religious war between implementations, and I realize
that the implementations are different, but the analogy of the idea of
specialization of generic containers and functions, with the resulting
type safety etc, is unmistakable, IMHO.

> I agree, even though I don't find static imports all that thrilling.

This is, indeed, more of a syntactic relief than anything else, though
quite nice to have.

-- 
Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED]

=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to