I am confused as to what could be wrong with determining that
Container<String> is *not* assignable to Container<Integer>. But are you
saying that the manually constructed parameterized Type *is* reported as
being assignable despite the obviously incompatible type parameters?
Matt
On Thu, May 30, 2024, 10:31 AM Sunny Chan <sunny.c...@crypto.com.invalid>
wrote:
> I have an issue with TypeUtils.isAssignableTo and I would like to check
> whether this is expected or a bug.
>
> Consider we have a number of classes
>
> class Container<A> {.......}
>
> class ParameterizedConstructor<String> {
> //consturctor that takes a container
> public ParameterizedConstructor(Container<String> input) {..}
> }
>
> Then if I use TypeUtils to create some parameterized type for checking
> purposes:
>
> //The following will give you TypeVariable with Container<String>
> var constructors = ParameterizedConstructor.class.getConstructors();
> var parameters = constructors[0].getGenericParameterTypes();
> Type assignableTo = parameters[0];
>
> // I want to check whether we can do a equals
> Type assignFrom = TypeUtils.parameterize(Container.class, Integer.class);
>
> //If you run this with lang 3 it will return true but I get a false here :
> TypeUtils.isAssignable(assignFrom, assignTo)
>
> Notice that if I use TypeUtils factory to create the parameterize type, it
> will return correct behaviour
>
> I am wondering whether we expect ParameterizedType from JDK is not expected
> to work here?
>
> Thanks
>
