> AFAIK removal of generic methods is so that under-the-hood we can switch the > methods implementation to a vtable
But shouldn't a vtable be able to handle generics that are attached to the base just fine? For instance, the `Test` class has a vtable with a single slot for `call`. An instantiation `Test[int]` would point to an `int` instantiation of `call`, and a `Test[float]` would point to the `float` instantiation. To my knowledge that's how it works in C++. On the other hand, generics not attached to the base, can result in multiple instantiations for a single method. This requires full program analysis, and doesn't play well with vtables.
