Good read. You got me wondering why type erasure is used. From the Java site:
Type erasure enables Java applications that use generics to maintain binary compatibility with Java libraries and applications that were created before generics. That might be why it feels more "natural" to me than the .NET stuff, just because I have a long history with Java. You're probably right on the .NET system being better in the long run, it was designed at a time when they could take all the lessons and mistakes of Java into account... On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Jonathan Pryor <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 16:42 -0800, neptune235 wrote: > > Oh, that's totally different than Java, but it seems to work fine. Thanks > for > > your help! > > That's because Java implements generics through type erasure, so all > generic instantiations use the same (non-generic) type. .NET generics > are real. > > This confers a number of advantages (and a few disadvantages with > respect to generic co- and contra-variance, which C# 4 fixes); see the > Completely Unbiased* article: > > http://www.jprl.com/Blog/archive/development/2007/Aug-31.html > > - Jon > > * read: biased, based on my experiences trying to understand Java > generics, then wondering wtf they were thinking... > > >
_______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
