On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 5:42 AM, Georg Ragaller <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for the investigation and answers. >> 4. Our use of generics is fairly extensive, and if their JVM is not >> Sun's, then there might be corner-cases which doesn't behave the same, >> i.e. Qi4j ends up clueless.. >> > > Due to type erasure, the byte code should not see anything of the generic > types. There is some reflective access to static type information related to > generics, but that should be handled with the promise of the citation above > regarding reflection. Well, the "reflective access to static type information" is one hell of a confusing API in the JDK classes, and I'll be surprised if an independent implementation will get the same result. For almost every case, we have programmed that with the proven "trial and error" method, i.e. debug to the point and then poke around and see if we can figure out to get hold of what we are looking for. BUT, I just received access to Google AppEngine for Java, so I hopefully will be able to try something out later in the week (have meetings all afternoon)... Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
