Well, this is not what I exactly meant: http://www.tutorialspoint.com/java/util/collections_unmodifiablelist.htm The class Collection define the method: public static <T> List<T> unmodifiableList(List<? extends T> list)
It returns an instance of List. I do not think there is a type UnmodifiedList since it is difficult to type this kind of things. I think monad helps here, but I am not expert. Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. On May 13, 2014, at 11:19 AM, Jan Vrany <jan.vr...@fit.cvut.cz> wrote: > On 13/05/14 15:50, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> I got an interest some years ago, to see if Context-Oriented-Programming >> would help to have immutable collections. >> >> Apparently, Java supports immutability at runtime (i.e., there is no class >> ImmutableArrayList as far as I know). > > Actually there is. Have a look at java.util.Collections, > java.util.Collections.UnmodifiableList/UnmodifiableRandomAccessList in > particular. Many libraries define their own immutable collections as far as I > have seen. > > There's no support for object immutability in the OpenJDK-based JVMs. > > Cheers, Jan > >> So, there is no good design for immutable collections as far as I know. I >> read something about that on Doug Lea web page. >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> > >
